Guest Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Yeast nutrient isn't generally required as the malt is nutrient enough to send the yeast on a feeding frenzy. Quite right Muddy. I personally do not use the kit yeast and need something to do with the little blighters.. if I do not do this then they just end up multiplying in my fridge.. It must be said too that I dont always do this... only when I remember, which can sometimes be infrequent... I still get an active ferment overnight if I have rehydrated and proofed. Which as said is my preferred option with specialty dried yeast. I still dont understand why the coopers packet yeast is only 7g though... PB2 can you explain this to me/us? Yob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB2 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 We supply a 7g sachet with our beer kits because 7g, in most instances, is sufficient to make an acceptable brew. Up to the late 90s, Coopers supplied just 5g of yeast in a non-insulative sachet. Although the best available at the time, this yeast was poor quality and we affectionately remember it by the term 'floor sweepings' [lol] We recognise that many brewers, particularly those who shop at specialist stores, buy a different yeast. They may toss the enclosed sachet, use it as a source of yeast hulls (nutrient) or use it to make excellent bread and pizza dough [biggrin] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Thanks for that PB2, I tkae it that the 5g packets (shudder.. and therefor well underpitched brews) is probably responsible for the kit 'twang' that still has the majority of the population afraid of any home crafted beer. For brews above 1040 then the 7g packet may (reads probably) still be underpitching. Pitching calculators such as MR MATLY (no affiliation)should (in my book) be used to determine what amount of yeast is actually required to properly ferment and attenuate. Just throwing in the 7g Kit yeast to a 1060 wort will not be as good as it could be.. ie stressed yeast produce bad flavour Yob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB2 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Yes, only 5g of 'floor sweepings'and I forgot to mention that they were also not Nitrogen flushed. [pinched] What is 'twang'? From my experience, brewers use the term 'twang' to describe more than one type of beer fault. The most common association with 'twang' is related to aged extract and/or excess simple sugar. Most beer faults can be avoided by sticking to the beer triangle. Can you be sure that the calculator is accurate?? Our laboratory tests on dry yeast show that viability of lager strains are generally lower than ale. Yet the calculator assumes the same viability, regardless of the strain [roll] Also, the rate at which viability drops with age is exaggerated. Mind you, it's proabably not such a bad thing, if all the errors/assumptions suggest pitching more yeast rather than less. [ninja] The vast majority of beer, made in Australian homes, starts at 10P (1040) or less. But yes, if fermenting a high gravity brew it's a good idea to pitch at a higher rate, either by simply adding more yeast or stepping up the yeast supplied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty A Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I thought the 'Twang' was mostly common to high ferment temps when brewing. I thought I had this taste in a couple of my brews and I also noticed they were creeping up to the 26C mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 the "twang" I refer to is referring to the bad flavours you get from stressed yeast, wether that be temperature related or underpitching. (such is my understanding) My Malty, and I stand to be corrected here, has something to do with John Palmer so I would have to assume it is pretty close to spot on. It also lets you choose between Ale Lager or Hybrid so the rates are specific for the style and type of yeast used. well thats how I understand it anyways.. happy to be corrected. Yob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 self correction Mr Malty is Copywrighted by Jamil Zainasheff. 6 of 1 half dozen of the other.. both brewing gods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB2 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Part of the point, I was trying to make - a beer may be described to smell like bananas, cloves, sulphur (like rotten eggs), cabbage, butterscotch, melon, passionfruit, etc. From these descriptors one would have some idea of the beer's aroma. Similar for flavours/mouthfeel - sweet, malty, salty, acidic, acetic (vinegar), sour (like sour milk), astringent, metallic, soapy, dry, etc. But 'twang' - wot [unsure] Some of the characters that High temps and underpitching may produce - green apple, cidery, a hot character to the nose (fusel), sulphur, banana... Yes, the calculator lets you choose between yeast strains but it assumes that viability is the same whether ale, lager or hybrid - this is not accurate. Anyway, it's not my role to dismantle the work of others. Suffice to say that this is another example of why Coopers does not endorse calculators or ready reckoners produced by third parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 fair point mate, will give you that. I wont derail this thread further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty A Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 I get what you mean Paul, even though we call it twang it isn't really a good descriptor as I say a matalic flavour is twang and you say the vinegar flavour is twang and everything is lost in translation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Waters Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 I always thought of twang as a sound and as my beer was always quiet I thought I must be doing something right. Oh well, back to the drawing board [pinched] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowbrew Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Sorry for bringing up a very old thread but on the subject of expiration dates i was just wondering how long Coopers give (as in time wise) to thier malt extract. As in if the expiry date on the can is say March 2017, does that mean it was canned 1 year ago in March 2016? Just curious is all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristinaS1 Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 No, they give it two years. Your can is two years old. You might want to replace the yeast or add some more to it. If this tin is a dark one, it'll probably be okay. If it is a light one, your results won't be the best. Add lots of hops and you might not notice. Cheers, Christina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowbrew Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Thanks Christina. I havn't bought one for my next batch yet, but i will tonight. Just wanted to know so i can judge how old they actually are. Going to buy a European Lager for a saison base and hopefully get it on tonight or tomorrow. Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.