Jump to content
Coopers Community

What's in Your Fermenter? 2020


Otto Von Blotto

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Mmmmm the day that the Coopers FV with the Kraussen Collar comes in handy ?!  ; )

Those festive heavy dark brews can kick up a fair old frothy top... but it will be a laaaarvely brew because of it Nicos!

 

Last night I had a sneaky slurp on my AG dark brew that is on its final run home -- down from 1068 -- around 1018 as it went into the SS FV for final clean-up and condition... and is lush already...  hoping to gas it in keg on nitro if all works out...  thinking it might still come down to around 1014.

image.png.9f92c4ff5933962187a8eb72f2c4ba75.png

I am jealous wish I had nitro for stouts 😢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of stouts, my little kit based version with some added oats, EKG, & vanilla extract finished at 1.015. First brew I've made in years with no dry hop, so straight into cold crash we went. Will likely keg it this coming Friday.

Cheers & good brewing,

Lusty.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently have the Luchador Spiced Chocolate Stout in the fermenting fridge bubbling away nicely at 19 degrees.  Bottled my Boerderij Ginger Saison last night - OG 1082 got all the way down to 1008, so pretty chuffed with that!  The ginger is very subtle, might use more in the next batch, but will wait the requisite 2 weeks before trying - looks like the Murrumbidgee at the moment 🙂

Tonight is a hard apple/pear cider for shits and giggles in the 5L Ikea jug with tap, perfectly sized for small experimental batches that don't break the bank.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Mmmmm the day that the Coopers FV with the Kraussen Collar comes in handy ?!  ; )

Yeah unfortunately my Coopers fermenter went to recycling after I had a run of bad batches in it. Assumed it had an infection hiding in it.

I should have really put it in the pressure fermenter. A couple of PSI would have kept it at bay. Unfortunately the summer ale was already  in it. I was too impatient to wait to for it to free up. 

I pulled a sample today to see what's happen and it's at 1.036 from 1.082 (1.5 days in) Also jealous of nitro out of interest how are you sourcing n2.

2 hours ago, Waynealford said:

Tonight is a hard apple/pear cider for shits and giggles in the 5L Ikea jug with tap, perfectly sized for small experimental batches that don't break the bank.

What did you use for it? You can get decent cider out from Aldi apple juice, apple/pear juice, and s04 or us05. It will end dry at close to 1.000 so you have to backsweeten with juice in the glass. I used to throw ldme for some extra nutrient for yeast and body. Sometimes I would add lactose, Frozen raspberries (makes it pink and brings some acidity) , or tea (for tannins). It used to be the girlfriend's quaffer - she started blaming me for making her fat.

Edited by NicolasW
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, NicolasW said:

Yeah unfortunately my Coopers fermenter went to recycling after I had a run of bad batches in it. Assumed it had an infection hiding in it.

I should have really put it in the pressure fermenter. A couple of PSI would have kept it at bay. Unfortunately the summer ale was already  in it. I was too impatient to wait to for it to free up. 

I pulled a sample today to see what's happen and it's at 1.036 from 1.082 (1.5 days in) Also jealous of nitro out of interest how are you sourcing n2.

What did you use for it? You can get decent cider out from Aldi apple juice, apple/pear juice, and s04 or us05. It will end dry at close to 1.000 so you have to backsweeten with juice in the glass. I used to throw ldme for some extra nutrient for yeast and body. Sometimes I would add lactose, Frozen raspberries (makes it pink and brings some acidity) , or tea (for tannins). It used to be the girlfriend's quaffer - she started blaming me for making her fat.

Hop and Grain's recipe, 3L apple juice, 850ml pear juice, 1 cup earl grey tea.  Tossing up whether to use the lactose or not, planning on using Nottingham yeast.  Interesting to not the need to back sweeten, that might mean the lactose is a good idea.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Do you Brewers think I can get away with one pack and do a reasonable healthy starter - say in 3L - and try to get the yeast happy and healthy into 21L of Wort  - and that I can get away with just one packet of yeast?

Its interesting that the pitching rate for Lallemand New England and Koln are double all their other strains. I've heard of some brewers using 1 packet of New England and still getting an ok beer. I've been too chicken to try it tbh. I can't really harvest the slurry for New England either because there's a crap load of hop material in it.

Have you used any of the other Voyager Malts? Are they any good? I've been pondering getting some in to use for my next AG. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Waynealford said:

Hop and Grain's recipe, 3L apple juice, 850ml pear juice, 1 cup earl grey tea.  Tossing up whether to use the lactose or not, planning on using Nottingham yeast.  Interesting to not the need to back sweeten, that might mean the lactose is a good idea.....

That recipe sounds like a good start. I used to go to aldi and load up on 18L of juice. It really depends on how dry you like it.

I found lactose wasn't particularly sweet and generally didn't have it around. In the end I started to use 400 g LDME in about 21L of Juice. According to my logs this would give a FG of 1007. You could also try one of the artificial sweetners if that's your thing (I've never used it). Its been 7 years since I've done a batch of it but it all went so it must have been ok.

FYI you might get some sulphur smells off the yeast.

Edited by NicolasW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Lovely lovely Mitchie - should be gold... am wondering - and I saw @Greeny1525229549 Greeny dropped past too - I only have one packet of same yeast lads...

Do you Brewers think I can get away with one pack and do a reasonable healthy starter - say in 3L - and try to get the yeast happy and healthy into 21L of Wort  - and that I can get away with just one packet of yeast?

Hey bb

You would get away with a quarter of a packet in a 3L starter but unfortunately you have to buy at least one. 😀😀A good kolsch is pitched and kept cool as well. I usually do mine at 16c till near the end then a slow ramp to 20c. Thats with K97 yeast though. Not sure how the lallemand one works.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fresh Draught is cruising along, low n slow at 12.5°. Not due for an SG until Sunday which will be day 7. Already thinking about the dry hop with another 12g of cascade. Would like some tips from the warren on best practice please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, RDT2 said:

I am jealous wish I had nitro for stouts 😢

Ah mate you know, well, the nitro is festive - true - but an additional PITA re regulators and lines and manifolds and gas bottles (besides having to pay for all that shitttt) but honestly - you can make a very very good keg Stout on C02 and also in bottles with good full bodied malt and high FG!  👍

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, NicolasW said:

Its interesting that the pitching rate for Lallemand New England and Koln are double all their other strains. I've heard of some brewers using 1 packet of New England and still getting an ok beer. I've been too chicken to try it tbh. I can't really harvest the slurry for New England either because there's a crap load of hop material in it.

Have you used any of the other Voyager Malts? Are they any good? I've been pondering getting some in to use for my next AG.  

Thanks Nicos.  Yeah well Mr Palmer says in general for reasonable population 2 packs AND a starter for my heavier OG beers.... mmm

 

Voyager - Yeah Gold.  Just watch Veloria Schooner malt re low diastatic power.  I did some checks back and an earlier brew went better when had more base malt in with it.

But yeah - lovely stuff mate.  Their Munich and Veloria is lovely.  I have Wheat and Pale too but not cracked them yet but mate I reckon it's great quality local product.

Definitely worth a try.  Everyone's tastes are a little different... but am pretty happy with what they do and is nice to buy local and support local growers.

I only buy whole bags cos am remote - and the bags got a coding you can trace back to the grower/paddock general location/year harvested/time malted etc...  worth a sniff mate I reckon.

 

Edited by Bearded Burbler
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Greeny1525229549 said:

You would get away with a quarter of a packet in a 3L starter but unfortunately you have to buy at least one. 😀😀A good kolsch is pitched and kept cool as well. I usually do mine at 16c till near the end then a slow ramp to 20c. Thats with K97 yeast though. Not sure how the lallemand one works. 

Sounds like a plan Greeny -  and 16 would be fine... traditional styles 10-20 deg C... I need a great big sack of it like the below picture ?!  😝

image.thumb.png.6aa168d68ea0613e2f579f1d8fa2a407.png

Edited by Bearded Burbler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Higher OG can seem to call for two packs in a starter not just the one...

I haven't had an issue, and most of my brews are above OG = 1.050, but starters are supposed to be to increase the amount of yeast available for the wort. That's the point of them over simple rehydration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2020 at 9:20 AM, Journeyman said:

And yet they do - faster than I see others on here get results and quicker overall in time of ferment. The 'bag of lollies' analogy would seem to be wrong.

I wasn't 'racing' I was informing. The 'recommended' process is slow and I noticed a distinct difference when I swapped to LDME to prime the starter so I am back to using raw sugar. This was faster to develop 'head' than I have noticed before but maybe I didn't have a reason to open the fridge 45 minutes in prior to this. 

Thick Kraussen in under 10 hours and never had a brew NOT at FG in 6 days - I go by results. YMMV. 😄

It did cross my mind that the results I see might be to do with vitality starter instead of viability but I use the exact same process each time, only the LDME and sugar changed.

 

The analogy might be wrong but the idea isn't. There are no nutrients in sugar which isn't ideal, and the yeast don't have to do much to ferment it either. They'll always go for the easiest sugars first and then they get thrown into a malt based wort which they have to work harder at, which may present issues. That's why starters are made with malt, because it's better to prep them in essentially the same conditions they'll be going into. 

It doesn't really matter how quickly or slowly a krausen forms. You claim to not be racing but compare the timeframe to others, and this difference is the only reason you've made this illconceived idea go back to sugar.  I've had lagers take 50 hours to start forming a krausen, still fermented out in the expected time and the beer was great. I've had ales form krausen in 12 hours or less, same outcome. Couple of years ago I had a 1.086 OG stout reach FG in a week. All malt based starters.

I don't know why the sugar based starter yeasts seem to take off quicker but it's not giving them the best preparation. There's obviously a reason nobody who knows anything about yeast recommends it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Higher OG can seem to call for two packs in a starter not just the one...

No, just a bigger starter. You're better off doing that than pitching too much yeast into it for the size. That results in too little growth compared to the initial cell count. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

No, just a bigger starter. You're better off doing that than pitching too much yeast into it for the size. That results in too little growth compared to the initial cell count. 

Thanks mate.   Good call.

Yeah it's just some tables in Palmer that seemed to be indicating twin packs and yeah a bigger starter as well...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Journeyman said:

above OG = 1.050

Some styles associated with higher OGs may require larger healthy yeast populations pitched which may be best achieved via rehydration of twin packs and then cultivation in an appropriately sized starting solution or so it seems in some of the brewing texts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bearded Burbler said:

Thanks mate.   Good call.

Yeah it's just some tables in Palmer that seemed to be indicating twin packs and yeah a bigger starter as well...

 

 

Some of the stuff on his site is outdated now. 

The ideal inoculation (pitch) rate for starters is between 25 and 100 million cells per mL. Unless you're making a starter that's like 6 or 7 litres or more, one pack will certainly fall between those two figures. It may be slightly below 25 but this isn't a problem, and better than going over the top end. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

It doesn't really matter how quickly or slowly a krausen forms. You claim to not be racing but compare the timeframe to others, and this difference is the only reason you've made this illconceived idea go back to sugar

No, I compare it to itself. I began starters with sugar and swapped to LDME and my brews slowed in both initial activity and length of time to FG - the 2nd was only by maybe a day on average but it was noticeable. And I did what everyone else does with posts, I mentioned the difference compared to other posters. You do exactly the same, even in this post I am quoting where you use your lager and ale examples.

11 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

I don't know why the sugar based starter yeasts seem to take off quicker but it's not giving them the best preparation. There's obviously a reason nobody who knows anything about yeast recommends it.

Nice appeal to authority there, but the first time I looked at starters there were a number of sources said to use sugar - that's why I used it. As for nutrients, I use old bakers yeast and/or old can yeast in the boil. Even Coopers recommend using sugar to do starters with their yeast.

It works for me and I've seen you and others recommend doing what works for the person you are responding to. I presented my experiences so others can, if they wish, give it a try. How many posts have you seen by people worried their brew hasn't worked because it's been 12, 20 or even more than 24 hours without activity?

Edited by Journeyman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

The analogy might be wrong but the idea isn't. There are no nutrients in sugar which isn't ideal, and the yeast don't have to do much to ferment it either. They'll always go for the easiest sugars first and then they get thrown into a malt based wort which they have to work harder at, which may present issues. That's why starters are made with malt, because it's better to prep them in essentially the same conditions they'll be going into. 

It doesn't really matter how quickly or slowly a krausen forms. You claim to not be racing but compare the timeframe to others, and this difference is the only reason you've made this illconceived idea go back to sugar.  I've had lagers take 50 hours to start forming a krausen, still fermented out in the expected time and the beer was great. I've had ales form krausen in 12 hours or less, same outcome. Couple of years ago I had a 1.086 OG stout reach FG in a week. All malt based starters.

I don't know why the sugar based starter yeasts seem to take off quicker but it's not giving them the best preparation. There's obviously a reason nobody who knows anything about yeast recommends it

There's a quick video on youtube from Sui Generis on why you shouldn't use sugar for your starters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i2TjwumpeA&t=22s

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NicolasW said:

There's a quick video on youtube from Sui Generis on why you shouldn't use sugar for your starters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i2TjwumpeA&t=22s

Interesting, and I might try 2 side-by-side brews with 2 different starters. (as in 1 with LDME and another with sugar)  

The issue I have is he lists possible problems with a sugar-based starter being - 

Delayed Start to ferment
Slow Ferment
Increased off flavours
Poor/incomplete attenuation.

I'm not seeing any of these issues, particularly NOT the 1st 2.

He also gives as the only reason in the lab for using LDME is cost. Surely if the problems listed above are an issue he would also give those as a reason they use LDME in the lab? I note also he doesn't compare like with like - the major expense in the YPD Media column is the peptone, presumably a nutrient base and for the LDME side he doesn't even factor in the yeast cost.

This is a false comparison and it should be something like, 10g yeast - $2.65 + 100g dex - $2.20 versus 10g yeast - $2.65 + 106g DME - $1.95. i.e. $4.85 vs $4.60 instead of the $9.29/L and $2.01/L he claims.

Such faulty arithmetic makes me doubt his conclusions but the info on how various sugars get into the yeast cell and whether they 'turn off' channels not being used is something I haven't seen before. Interesting, but against that is I haven't seen any of those problems listed by using sugar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Journeyman said:

No, I compare it to itself. I began starters with sugar and swapped to LDME and my brews slowed in both initial activity and length of time to FG - the 2nd was only by maybe a day on average but it was noticeable. And I did what everyone else does with posts, I mentioned the difference compared to other posters. You do exactly the same, even in this post I am quoting where you use your lager and ale examples.

Nice appeal to authority there, but the first time I looked at starters there were a number of sources said to use sugar - that's why I used it. As for nutrients, I use old bakers yeast and/or old can yeast in the boil. Even Coopers recommend using sugar to do starters with their yeast.

It works for me and I've seen you and others recommend doing what works for the person you are responding to. I presented my experiences so others can, if they wish, give it a try. How many posts have you seen by people worried their brew hasn't worked because it's been 12, 20 or even more than 24 hours without activity?

The question is for the first part, why is this a problem? What's the obsession with having everything start and finish as soon as possible? Maybe that's too strong a word but it's the way it comes across. 

Quicker doesn't automatically mean better. You can ferment a brew at 30 degrees and it will be quicker, and a worse outcome than one fermented at 20, aside from those yeasts that are intended to be used that high. I'm not actually comparing my timeframes to anything, simply stating what they are. They've always been around the same, with the odd batch finishing in around 4 days. 

I also wonder if you're confusing proofing yeast with making actual yeast starters. I've seen sugar recommended for that, but never for proper yeast starters. You can call it whatever nonsense you like but I'm simply taking advice from those who have expertise in the field, have done the research and reached the conclusion about what is best, and putting that into practice. None of them recommends using cane sugar to grow yeast starters for brewing beer. Taken to an extreme, there wouldn't be any point in forums like this existing at all if nobody ever asked for or  took advice from those who know more about a subject than they do. 

Reactivating bottle yeast is also a different process and irrelevant. Are you adding old yeast to starters or the batch itself? Of course there are some nutrients in it, but still not the full gamut that you get in malt.

Sure I've advised people before to do what works for them but these are usually processes that won't potentially ruin a batch. 

I've also seen people panicking about brews that in actual fact are taking a normal amount of time to show visible signs. They're usually newbies, usually not even making starters and simply sprinkling the dry yeast onto the batch, and once advised that it's normal to take that long, they magically don't panic about it anymore.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

I also wonder if you're confusing proofing yeast with making actual yeast starters. I've seen sugar recommended for that, but never for proper yeast starters

I was proofing yeast at the start and I've also done it for making bread prior to getting into HB.

I also altered my starters because of recommendations on here to use LDME; as noted several times the only result I saw was a slowing of both initial activity and length of time to reach FG. If sugar harms the yeast in some way, I'm not seeing it; faster activity would seem to suggest that's a crock - the yeast IN THE WORT is responding rapidly to the sugars present in the wort so it seems raw sugar at the beginning has NOT altered how it works in any negative way.

As for what I call it, I got that from you and others here - I take my 1L saved yeast from the fridge, pour off the 'beer', add 3L of warm water and the LDME or sugar and shake. When I see residue forming on the bottom I shake again, usually a couple of times over the space of several hours. When the wort is ready I shake it up, pour off 1L and pitch the rest.

The only difference I am aware of is I am not waiting a day or more for the yeast in the starter to finish ferment. Perhaps that is why I am not seeing negatives from using sugar - they yeast doesn't actually get time to shut down the alternate pathways into the cells?

When experience runs counter to theory, I tend to believe experience. *shrugs* YMMV

Edited by Journeyman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...