Mark D Pirate Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 @Otto Von Blotto Exact same reasons I've come to for my pitching rates, I've run side by sides enough to have seen the under pitched batch almost stall, have longer lag times and present some unexpected flavours in the glass. It's not just about cell counts, yeast health is just as important ( major advantage of dried yeast) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenyinthewestofsydney Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 9 hours ago, Beerlust said: Belgian strains are a whole different kettle of fish. Anyone that has used a few variants of them will know that. Saison strains are particularly high attenuating. Almost all of the "Farmhouse" strains also have high attenuation. What is the strain you are referring to, & what pitching rate are you using? Cheers, Lusty. 1214. Last batch OG 1076 with a finish of 1006. Attenuation of 92%. This is a touch above average. It usually finishes 89 ish. But never had it stop below 85. Wyeast have a 74-78 figure of that one. I also suspect the yeast has mutated on this one as it is in the teens for reuse. 3787. Last batch OG 1076 with a finish at 1002. Attenuation of 97%. This is also a touch above average. Usually 93 ish. Lowest i have ever had is 88 which was one i mashed at 69c. Wyeast have a 74-78 on that one too. I actually slightly underpitch these yeasts to get the authentic flavour. I use a 0.75 pitch rate which from what i read is what the trappist breweries do as well. In the early days i pitched normal and they were done in 4 days or so but were bland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Pirate Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 You consider a pitching rate of 0.75 M / ml / P° to be underpitched ? That's generally considered a very healthy pitch rate for an ale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenyinthewestofsydney Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mark D Pirate said: You consider a pitching rate of 0.75 M / ml / P° to be underpitched ? That's generally considered a very healthy pitch rate for an ale For a high gravity batch yes its supposed to be underpitched. 1.0 is supposedly the normal pitch rate for a high gravity ale. If there is such a thing as normal. Only for ales do i worry about the pitch rates because it does make a difference. Lagers i regulary overpitch with slurrys. Pitching calculators are not needed with lagers in my experience. Agree with lusty on a lot of things. This aint one of them. Im in your and kelseys camp on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 2 hours ago, Greeny1525229549 said: 1214. Last batch OG 1076 with a finish of 1006. Attenuation of 92%. This is a touch above average. It usually finishes 89 ish. But never had it stop below 85. Wyeast have a 74-78 figure of that one. I also suspect the yeast has mutated on this one as it is in the teens for reuse. 3787. Last batch OG 1076 with a finish at 1002. Attenuation of 97%. This is also a touch above average. Usually 93 ish. Lowest i have ever had is 88 which was one i mashed at 69c. Wyeast have a 74-78 on that one too. Yeast can only ferment what is fermentable. If you are wanting a higher FG then use some grain types that will help with this. Sounds like you need some more Cara in your diet. Cheers & good brewing, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenyinthewestofsydney Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, Beerlust said: Yeast can only ferment what is fermentable. If you are wanting a higher FG then use some grain types that will help with this. Sounds like you need some more Cara in your diet. Cheers & good brewing, Lusty. This recipe actually had a fair bit of cara type malt. 6kg pilsener. 500gm of carabelge, 500gm of special B and 500gm each of invert dark and white sugar. 20L split into 2. I bet if i fermented with US05 it wouldnt get below 1010. Its just the yeast but i have no idea why they dont update the websites. 74-78 is just plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, Greeny1525229549 said: This recipe actually had a fair bit of cara type malt. 6kg pilsener. 500gm of carabelge, 500gm of special B and 500gm each of invert dark and white sugar. 20L split into 2. I bet if i fermented with US05 it wouldnt get below 1010. Its just the yeast but i have no idea why they dont update the websites. 74-78 is just plain wrong. After reading that, I admit, that is surprising. It might be worth flicking Wyeast a message. Cheers & good brewing, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 7:36 PM, Greeny1525229549 said: Dont believe everything you read lusty. The said manufacturer also says most of my belgian yeasts finish between 74 and 78 attenuation. Try 90 to 95. They are close though. Only 15% or so out. 100 million cells is good if your making a mild ale. Thats about it. Attenuation is affected by a number of factors including the fermentability of the wort. For example, I can get some fluctuations even with US-05 if I dramatically change the grist up. Wyeast cannot predict the wort you plan to use the strain on, or it's makeup. The figures they publish would be based around fermenting a generic wort of some description with that strain. After home brewing for a little while I learned not to completely trust the associated figures of any yeast strain, & simply through logging my OG & FG figures over a number of brews with it, created my own attenuation figure for it. The 1.060 OG they quote as being able to ferment out with their smack pack has to be a little more accurate as it would be a point that a consumer that had a failed brew from it within that OG limit, could request a refund if the product fails. Cheers, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 7:56 PM, Otto Von Blotto said: Not if you are using recommended pitching rates. 100 billion cells, not all of which would be viable into 20 odd litres of 1.060 OG wort is underpitched by more than half. Again...underpitched by recommended commercial pitching standards, not by home brew based requirements. Cheers, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Von Blotto Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 I don't see a difference between requirements. It doesn't matter what size the batch is, you still need to pitch enough yeast to do the job properly. You're arguing against a method that works very well. If someone doesn't want consistently high quality then by all means don't worry about it. My standards are very high. I would argue that basing home brew practices on commercial standards is the best way to achieve consistently high quality outcomes. These practices don't have to be exactly the same, and they never really will be, but they are very useful to learn from to improve your own beer. Personally, I'm not gonna spend all the time and effort brewing a batch to risk it turning out crap by getting slack with yeast because "home brew standards", whatever they are, suggest that it doesn't matter. Maybe that's why it has the cheap piss reputation that it has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 42 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said: I don't see a difference between requirements. And there in lies your problem. 43 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said: It doesn't matter what size the batch is, you still need to pitch enough yeast to do the job properly. You're arguing against a method that works very well. No, I'm arguing about the necessity for home brewers to follow commercial pitching rates. 46 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...If someone doesn't want consistently high quality then by all means don't worry about it. My standards are very high. As are mine for my level of brewing, & I've been underpitching (by commercial standards) in a lot of cases for 6-7 years now with my beers. 49 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...I would argue that basing home brew practices on commercial standards is the best way to achieve consistently high quality outcomes. These practices don't have to be exactly the same, and they never really will be, but they are very useful to learn from to improve your own beer. You're sneakily widening the conversation there. Do I believe some commercial practices should be mimicked in a home brewing environment, YES. Do I believe all commercial brewing practices are required to be followed in a home brewing environment to achieve high quality beer, NO. 53 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...Personally, I'm not gonna spend all the time and effort brewing a batch to risk it turning out crap by getting slack with yeast because "home brew standards", whatever they are, suggest that it doesn't matter. Maybe that's why it has the cheap piss reputation that it has. No-one is talking about getting 'slack' mate, & no-one is suggesting 'it doesn't matter'. What I am saying in this case is this commercial level is NOT a requirement. There is nothing wrong with providing information of the highest standards for people to read & view, but when you state it is a requirement, that is simply untrue. Cheers & good brewing, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Von Blotto Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I didn't state it as a requirement full stop, I stated it as a requirement to consistently high quality beer because it is, just like keeping the temperature in the right place is. How much research have you actually done into yeast? I know you've done a lot of work with hops, but from some of your comments it seems to me that the yeast side of things has largely been ignored. Sure you'll make beer with a large underpitch but there's more chance it won't be as good as it could be and that the results will be inconsistent from batch to batch. There are also other issues with fermentation performance being at higher risk of occurring. How do you know your beers wouldn't have been even better if you'd pitched more yeast into them in line with recommended rates? There is obviously some leeway with it, a small underpitch isn't likely to cause any problems but underpitching by more than half is ridiculous. I don't know why the Wyeast packets have that on them but I've never taken any notice of it - you'd get more cells in a pack of Coopers kit yeast and most of the time it is advised to use more than one pack if the OG goes above 1.050, let alone 1.060. The question is, why doesn't it matter on a home brew level? What is so different about home brew that magically the amount of yeast pitched doesn't matter as much? If the only answer is "well we aren't brewing it to sell" then that's a pretty piss poor reason. Surely if the goal is the best quality you can make, and achieving it consistently, then it does matter. Why should home brewers settle for mediocrity when they can easily have excellence? Because that's the way it comes across. I realise not every brewer is aiming for top quality, I really can't understand why given the time it takes, but for those who are that's what they do batch after batch, year after year. Every part of the process is done to the highest standard possible at home in order to achieve consistently high quality beer. If something stuffs up along the way then the quality usually goes down on that batch. I've had it happen myself, brewing without kettle finings ruined a batch or two of pilsner. The main reasons behind those pitching rates are flavor profile and ensuring fermentation is completed in a timely manner. Other benefits include reducing the risk of infection by giving the yeast the best chance to dominate the wort/reducing lag times. There's no good reason not to do it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Pirate Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 @Beerlust Without trying to provoke further argument, have you actually run a side by side pitch rate experiment for yourself ? Ideally you'd use wort from a single batch and split it, not a dig at your kitchen based process this time ( not setting a precedent though ) . Simple fact is that I have and it makes a difference , I'm not expecting anyone to just take my word for it but just test it for yourself and do your best to control all other variables. In all fairness there are some exceptions that break the rules, Coopers yeast is one of these . You may have even attended the 4 way experiment presented to club on this very subject but this is not normal behaviour and just proves that Coopers yeast in an animal 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YeastyBoy Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I really feel for Zelly. It seemed to be such a simple question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porschemad911 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: I don't know why the Wyeast packets have that on them but I've never taken any notice of it... I don't know, I have some faith in it. Pretty sure they know a bit more about how much of their yeast is needed to ferment a home brew sized batch than you or I. Cheers, John Edited January 23, 2019 by porschemad911 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Von Blotto Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 13 minutes ago, porschemad911 said: I don't know, I have some faith in it. Pretty sure they know a bit more about how much of their yeast is needed to ferment a home brew sized batch than you or I. Cheers, John Perhaps, but I'd rather not take the risk. Besides, it'd be quite a bit more expensive buying a smack pack every batch compared to harvesting and reusing it from my starters. They also suggest that it shouldn't be reused more than 4-5 times but I've taken them to 15 or more without issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Pirate Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 45 minutes ago, YeastyBoy said: I really feel for Zelly. It seemed to be such a simple question. I feel for the guy too, like many web based forum it got off topic, I try to give simple answers to simple questions. However.... My way is the correct way, it's the ONLY way to make nice beer and if I differ then you're wrong and should be ashamed of yourself... ( nope, not in any part of the multiverse is mine the only way, I'll keep producing solid and clean beers.... You do you) Lusty also has a weird looking chin, grow a beard!!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: I didn't state it as a requirement full stop, I stated it as a requirement to consistently high quality beer because it is, Would that not qualify as a requirement? That basically says to a person, if you don't adhere to this standard, that means you are aiming to make sub-standard beer. 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: How much research have you actually done into yeast? Enough that I've used many more varieties of yeast than you have. And a number at varying ferment temperatures than you have, with different grists than you have, with varying pitching rates than you have. Enough research for you? 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...Sure you'll make beer with a large underpitch but there's more chance it won't be as good as it could be and that the results will be inconsistent from batch to batch. There are also other issues with fermentation performance being at higher risk of occurring. How do you know your beers wouldn't have been even better if you'd pitched more yeast into them in line with recommended rates? There is obviously some leeway with it, a small underpitch isn't likely to cause any problems but underpitching by more than half is ridiculous. Who's talking about "underpitching". I'm certainly not. I'm just not overpitching on what is actually required which is exactly what commercial pitching rates are. PB2 once spoke about the advised pitching rates spat out from the Mr. Malty calculator that works off of a commercial pitching rate as being, "over exaggerated". I align myself with that belief. Sorry if I've mis-quoted you Paul. I'm more inclined to believe a guy that has worked for a commercial brewery for many years with access to their lab guys on ACTUAL required pitching rates under homebrew (small scale) conditions than I am an American who hangs out with commercial craft brewers & boasts ideals based on commercial pitching guarantees that are in fact overpitching. 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...I don't know why the Wyeast packets have that on them but I've never taken any notice of it - you'd get more cells in a pack of Coopers kit yeast and most of the time it is advised to use more than one pack if the OG goes above 1.050, let alone 1.060. I do take notice of it & stay within the limits they quote. Pushing the limits is when you often run into trouble. 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...The question is, why doesn't it matter on a home brew level? What is so different about home brew that magically the amount of yeast pitched doesn't matter as much? If the only answer is "well we aren't brewing it to sell" then that's a pretty piss poor reason. Surely if the goal is the best quality you can make, and achieving it consistently, then it does matter. Why should home brewers settle for mediocrity when they can easily have excellence? Because that's the way it comes across. I realise not every brewer is aiming for top quality, I really can't understand why given the time it takes, but for those who are that's what they do batch after batch, year after year. Every part of the process is done to the highest standard possible at home in order to achieve consistently high quality beer. If something stuffs up along the way then the quality usually goes down on that batch. I've had it happen myself, brewing without kettle finings ruined a batch or two of pilsner. Just to condense this, if you are not pitching yeast to the equal of commercial pitching rates then Otto man says you are making beer to the standard of "mediocrity". Only if you pitch commercial volumes of yeast at your wort can you achieve greatness. 10 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...The main reasons behind those pitching rates are flavor profile and ensuring fermentation is completed in a timely manner. Other benefits include reducing the risk of infection by giving the yeast the best chance to dominate the wort/reducing lag times. There's no good reason not to do it. You & I brew quite different beers. At least 2 of the 3 you brew are quite malt & yeast flavour driven so I understand your need to make sure your yeast pitching rates are NOT underpitched. That doesn't make the ideal of precautionary overpitching necessary over all styles of beer. Your pitching rates are pretty much based around that. Aside from that, have a read of THIS article (if you haven't already) Among the contents it'll explain why the smack packs work so well against your better judgement. It took me a while to find it as I haven't read it for a number of years. Someone here on the forum posted the link quite a few years back (I think?) Well worth the read for those aspiring "Yeast Daddy's". 9 hours ago, Mark D Pirate said: @Beerlust Without trying to provoke further argument, have you actually run a side by side pitch rate experiment for yourself ? Ideally you'd use wort from a single batch and split it, not a dig at your kitchen based process this time ( not setting a precedent though ) . Simple fact is that I have and it makes a difference , I'm not expecting anyone to just take my word for it but just test it for yourself and do your best to control all other variables. In all fairness there are some exceptions that break the rules, Coopers yeast is one of these. You may have even attended the 4 way experiment presented to club on this very subject but this is not normal behaviour and just proves that Coopers yeast in an animal I'm really glad you mentioned this Mark. If you didn't, I was going to. You & I were both there for Kieren's presentation on different pitching rates that night. After sampling the 4 beers & everyone present having to pen to paper their thoughts on very specific characters in the beers I think maybe 3-4 guys claimed they could taste &/or smell differences between some of them. That was a good turnout that night of maybe 30-40 odd people yeah? There is certainly no harm in pitching to commercial levels, but don't preach to me that it is altogether necessary because 7-8 years of quite diverse experimentation with quite a variety of yeast strains at varying pitching rates & varying other points of preparation & difference has taught me different. My apologies to the O.P. but some of this needed to be said. Cheers, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Von Blotto Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 First of all, yes it would qualify as a requirement - for high quality beer. It's not a requirement to simply make beer, however. Who decided that it was a "fact" that recommended pitching rates are overpitching for home brew? You? I use them every batch regardless of style and funnily enough they all turn out exactly as they should. If it really was an overpitch then the beer should be blander than it is. Most of my beers aren't yeast flavor driven at all actually, I almost always brew beers that are dominated by malt and hop flavors. Yeast driven brews aren't my thing at all. As usual you're misquoting me again. I also didn't say that underpitching by recommended rates will result in shit beer. I said the risk of that outcome is higher with a large underpitch, as is the risk of inconsistent quality. Why does everybody around here read "increased risk" as "THIS IS DEFINITELY GOING TO HAPPEN"? FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelly Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 Thanks all, for your inputs but let’s leave this topic alone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben 10 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 @Zelly - it's okay, us kids fight from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Zelly said: Thanks all, for your inputs but let’s leave this topic alone I'm guessing this still has a few days to run before they reluctantly agree to disagree. Don't blame yourself!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark D Pirate Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 @Beerlust Interesting article but has very little to do with pitching rate and focused more on the role of oxygen in the early stages of ferment. In fact the article suggests that a pitching rate of 1M / mL / P° is preferable meaning that a standard sized batch of 1.050 wort should have 215 Billion cells ......i like smackpacks as a viability test, I know I'm getting very healthy yeast but due to shipping delays they can often be months old, I changed supplier for my yeast and now use Imperial. Very similar price to Wyeast, twice the cell counts though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben 10 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, Mark D Pirate said: they can often be months old, That's why I order howw I do, I have had some here under 4 weeks from manufacturing date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerlust Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: Who decided that it was a "fact" that recommended pitching rates are overpitching for home brew? You? No, & it's not just for home brew. That is in general. As I've said before, home brewers don't make giga-litre brews that have to guarantee 100% success all of the time to ferment out. The commercial pitching rates are about risk management, nothing to do with how much yeast is actually required to ferment out the brew successfully. As far as who decided that it was fact, you'll have to take that up with the yeasties themselves. 2 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...Most of my beers aren't yeast flavor driven at all actually, I almost always brew beers that are dominated by malt and hop flavors. Yeast driven brews aren't my thing at all. If the yeast is having no bearing on the flavours of your beer, perhaps use a farmhouse ale strain on your Pilsner recipe next time? 2 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: As usual you're misquoting me again. I also didn't say that underpitching by recommended rates will result in shit beer. I said the risk of that outcome is higher with a large underpitch, as is the risk of inconsistent quality. No, it's you that are misquoting. Nowhere above did I say you said it "will result in shit beer". You certainly inferred it though. You used the term "mediocrity". 2 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said: ...I use them every batch regardless of style and funnily enough they all turn out exactly as they should. Of course they do, because you're processes never change. If you ever decide to emerge from your current yeast bubble & experiment with different pitching rates you may actually learn the difference between "required" & "recommended" as I have. But you won't, out of sheer fear of a brew failing. 2 hours ago, Zelly said: Thanks all, for your inputs but let’s leave this topic alone As Ben10 & Hairy said, occasionally some conversations go a little deeper than normal & folks disagree on things. Nothing wrong with nutting that out sometimes. There's no malice intended from my end. Otto Von Blotto & I have been apart of the forum for 7 odd years now. I wish you well with your future brewing Zelly. Cheers, Lusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now