LOB dry yeast

[RPh_Guy]

Any low oxygen brewers out there use dry yeast?

Do you get good results?

How do you pitch it?

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I do occasionally.
Mainly I keep a pack of 34/70 around to toss in if it seems like I've got a stuck ferment. THat has saved two batches. Yes, I exposed the fermenter to O2 by opening it and tossing it in, but the rapidly resumed fermentation seems to have mitigated that in both cases. I pitched it dry.

Recently I did a full primary fermentation pitch of dry yeast (34/70 again - it's my go-to dry yeast). I think I dry pitched it again, but in the past I have also rehydrated it, and not even worried about preboiling the rehydration water because you're oxygenating the wort at pitch anyway.

So the short answer is yes, and I've done it both ways without appreciable (to me) difference.

 

[mongoose33]

Any low oxygen brewers out there use dry yeast?

Do you get good results?

How do you pitch it?

Yes.

Yes.

I just sprinkle it in.


Here's the funny part: not supposed to oxygenate the wort with dry yeast. That makes sense from a LODO point of view, in that we've worked hard to avoid oxidizing the wort all through the process only to intentionally add O2 prior to pitching.

But the dry yeast is supposed to be ready w/o O2. I've talked to the Fermentis people and they argue that the yeast in dry form are packed with sterols and such which is supposed to be enough to support budding off of new cells. Since O2 is used to make sterols and to support cell wall construction, that makes sense. What doesn't is that there'd be enough for a few generations of cell creation.

But it seems to work. I recently used dry yeast in a brew, no oxygenating the wort, and it worked just fine. It just seems so counter to what would seem to be necessary.

 

[Schlenkerla]

Yes.

Yes.

I just sprinkle it in.


Here's the funny part: not supposed to oxygenate the wort with dry yeast. That makes sense from a LODO point of view, in that we've worked hard to avoid oxidizing the wort all through the process only to intentionally add O2 prior to pitching.

But the dry yeast is supposed to be ready w/o O2. I've talked to the Fermentis people and they argue that the yeast in dry form are packed with sterols and such which is supposed to be enough to support budding off of new cells. Since O2 is used to make sterols and to support cell wall construction, that makes sense. What doesn't is that there'd be enough for a few generations of cell creation.

But it seems to work. I recently used dry yeast in a brew, no oxygenating the wort, and it worked just fine. It just seems so counter to what would seem to be necessary.

Then there's the problem of removing sulfites. If you don't get them out, does it inhibit the yeast?

I oxygenate for the above reason.

I like to use dry yeast and I started to make vitality starters. May not be necessary but I had issues with more than 48 hours before I saw activity, the activity was very slow or sluggish. I did the no oxygenate and sprinkled on yeast. Decided that was the last time to do that.

Now I always oxygenate and pitch active yeast.

 

[mongoose33]

Then there's the problem of removing sulfites. If you don't get them out, does it inhibit the yeast?

I oxygenate for the above reason.

I like to use dry yeast and I started to make vitality starters. May not be necessary but I had issues with more than 48 hours before I saw activity, the activity was very slow or sluggish. I did the no oxygenate and sprinkled on yeast. Decided that was the last time to do that.

Now I always oxygenate and pitch active yeast.

There's something fundamental about dry yeast that I don't understand. I've been searching fruitlessly for answers that would tie all this together.

Last time I used dry yeast, I had activity in 18 hours. Just sprinkled it on the wort. That's about what I'd expect.

I haven't had issues with sulfites that I can detect, though I'm careful to not say there aren't any--maybe I just can't detect the consequences.

****

The dry yeast people say just sprinkle it in. No hydration, no vitality starters--though I can't see any harm in either of those.

The same goes for liquid yeast. I attended a beer boot camp put on by BYO last March. Attended a day-long workshop on yeast taught by Chris White, the guy who started White Labs. He's got a PhD and all that, seems to know what he's talking about.

The question came up about doing starters. He said as long as the yeast was reasonably fresh, he'd just pitch it, no starter. This for ales, lagers would need two packs--or a starter.

Well. This was news to me. I've mentioned this before on HBT and a few people commented that, well, he's selling it and the last thing he wants people to think is that his yeast needs a starter. Except....why would he tell people to use a method that wouldn't work well? Wouldn't that do his business more harm than good?

So...my son, who was also there, decided he'd try that. After about 3 or 4 brews, that's now his standard practice--no starter, just pitch it. I was skeptical, but he'd brewed a very nice Kolsch doing this, so I decided to do it. Oxygenated the wort as per normal, pitched a warmed-up pack of White Labs 029. No starter.

That beer was terrific. I kegged it in 10 days, served it at a local homebrew group at 11 days, and it was a hit. Nobody believed that A) it was only 11 days grain to glass, and B) I didn't use a starter.

So....all this suggests to me, subject to all of you offering critique and ideas, that pitch rate isn't as big a deal as we think.

I've seen estimates that only 1/2 of dry yeast survive a direct pitch, but IIRC, that's still 100 billion cells. A pack of liquid yeast starts at 100 billion cells, but even if it's down to 75 billion, that would seem to be enough (though oxygenation might play a role here).

****

I'm simply missing something about yeast biology. Conventional wisdom is you should use a starter for liquid yeast, but at least in some cases, not apparently necessary.

And conventional wisdom was to rehydrate dry yeast before pitching. The vitality starter isn't conventional wisdom, but then again, I pitch starters after about 17 hours on the stir plate, and pitch the whole thing in. Just did that Saturday with a dark lager.

So I hope that more ideas and understanding is forthcoming here. I don't just want a recipe (do it this way); I want to understand why it's the best way.

Sorry for the semi-rant.

 

[Robert65]

I am not up to diving full on into this conversation, but may have a useful contribution. I have had a number of email exchanges with tech reps at the manufacturers in the past and been provided with some informative papers (various subjects, really wanted to love dry yest, really don't, full disclosure.) One interesting thing I learned regarding direct pitching is that over 96% of cells survive according to their studies, not the mythical 50%. Loss of viability actually proves significantly greater with rehydration, which also introduces opportunities for contamination. If you do use dry yeast, direct dry pitching is preferred. Repitch just like liquid. But one reason I don't like dry yeast is that IME I get very poor and abnormal performance in the first generation whether direct pitched, rehydrated, or propagated through a couple of starter steps. Lag times many times greater than the ~5 hours I expect with both ales and lagers pitched with liquid yeast, and abnormal attenuation, flocculation and beer pH are among these problems. I don't know why. A couple of generations in, things are fine, but I don't care to make bad beer to get to the good.

Sorry for another semi-rant.

 

[Vale71]

I don't know why.

That's a well know fact about dry yeast. The hydration/rehydration process is extremely stressful to yeast and will influence its behaviour for several generations. Most notable effects are underattenuation and reduced ester production (try making a traditional Bavarian Hefe with dry yeast and you'll soon give up in despair). After a few repitches it all goes back to normal and the yeast will express the character that is typical for the strain it belongs to.

 

[Vale71]

But the dry yeast is supposed to be ready w/o O2. I've talked to the Fermentis people and they argue that the yeast in dry form are packed with sterols and such which is supposed to be enough to support budding off of new cells. Since O2 is used to make sterols and to support cell wall construction, that makes sense. What doesn't is that there'd be enough for a few generations of cell creation.

You have to consider that if you oxygenate wort prior to pitching all that O2 will be taken up by first-generation cells during the lag phase. No oxygen will be available to subsequent generations for sterol synthesis and hence the sterol inherited from the parent cells is all that will be available down the road.
The manufacturer is claiming that dry yeast has sterol reserves at the time it undergoes drying that are equivalent to what liquid yeast would develop if pitched into properly aerated wort, so that the two processes are completely equivalent from a cell growth standpoint.

 

[Bassman2003]

I would like this conversation to continue as yeast processes are all over the place in home brewing. From my experience, making a starter with liquid yeast has yielded the best results. While I have made beers with dry and direct pitching liquid, the lag times have some times been up to 48 hours! Something just seems like it is on a better course when you have an active airlock in 4-8 hours.

But, we all want the best and easiest methods right? I like the idea of the Imperial Organic guys of giving you 200 bil cells. If my LHBS carried them I would probably be a fan. I think all yeast will get there in the end but the end goal might be different for folks.

 

[mongoose33]

You have to consider that if you oxygenate wort prior to pitching all that O2 will be taken up by first-generation cells during the lag phase. No oxygen will be available to subsequent generations for sterol synthesis and hence the sterol inherited by the parent cells is all that will be available down the road.

I assume you mean daughter cells?

The manufacturer is claiming that dry yeast has sterol reserves at the time it undergoes drying that are equivalent to what liquid yeast would develop if pitched into properly aerated wort, so that the two processes are completely equivalent from a cell growth standpoint.

This I understand, at least, the manufacturer's claims. What I've understood to be the case is the parent cells are packed with sterols, enough to allow for cell wall building of subsequent daughter cells.

What are they doing if there's more oxygen present? Making even more sterols? Is there a limit to how many/much sterols there can be in a cell?

And what about the daughter cells? How many sterols did they inherit, if any, from the parent cells? Or are they creating sterols differently in the absence of oxygen?

I need to go back and re-read White and Zainesheff's "Yeast" book--I think there's an alternate metabolic pathway to creating sterols, but can't remember for sure.

 

[Vale71]

I assume you mean daughter cells?

Actually, I meant from the parent cells. Got my prepositions mixed up...

This I understand, at least, the manufacturer's claims. What I've understood to be the case is the parent cells are packed with sterols, enough to allow for cell wall building of subsequent daughter cells.

What are they doing if there's more oxygen present? Making even more sterols? Is there a limit to how many/much sterols there can be in a cell?

And what about the daughter cells? How many sterols did they inherit, if any, from the parent cells? Or are they creating sterols differently in the absence of oxygen?

I need to go back and re-read White and Zainesheff's "Yeast" book--I think there's an alternate metabolic pathway to creating sterols, but can't remember for sure.

Oxygen is not only used for sterol synthesis, so in the presence of sufficient sterol reserves the O2 will be used for other methabolic pathways, not least the respiratory methabolism of sugar. Yeast cannot generally have more than 10% of their dry weight as sterols, above that synthesis will stop.

There is no alternate anaerobic pathway for sterol synthesis so a degradation in the vitality of subsequent generations is the inevitable consequence of sterol depletion.

 

[Vale71]

Here is the complete pathway for sterol synthesis. WARNING: can cause severe headache.

http://smpdb.ca/pathwhiz/pathways/PW002482

In the verbal description on the left there are several steps where you'll see oxygen mentioned as part of the reaction. There is no way to bypass those steps.

 

[Schlenkerla]

That's a well know fact about dry yeast. The hydration/rehydration process is extremely stressful to yeast and will influence its behaviour for several generations. Most notable effects are underattenuation and reduced ester production (try making a traditional Bavarian Hefe with dry yeast and you'll soon give up in despair). After a few repitches it all goes back to normal and the yeast will express the character that is typical for the strain it belongs to.

I love the repitch idea! - Thanks!

I also do the ferulic acid rests at 113F and open ferment to allow more ester formation.

From my understanding:

Clove (Phenolic)
A) From mashing with a ferulic acid rest
B) Supposedly cooler fermentation.

Banana (Ester)
A) From yeast, however open fermentation has less CO2 present to inhibit esters.
B) Supposedly warmer fermentation.
C) Multiple Generation Repitches

Adding C) thanks to you.

 

[Schlenkerla]

That's a well know fact about dry yeast. The hydration/rehydration process is extremely stressful to yeast and will influence its behaviour for several generations. Most notable effects are underattenuation and reduced ester production (try making a traditional Bavarian Hefe with dry yeast and you'll soon give up in despair). After a few repitches it all goes back to normal and the yeast will express the character that is typical for the strain it belongs to.

Off Topic - You mind dropping in there? Adding anything you're doing for hefeweizen.

I'm not sure if this truly violates LOB tenants if it's only open during the active fermentation.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/index.php?threads/659768/

 

[Vale71]

I love the repitch idea! - Thanks!

I also do the ferulic acid rests at 113F and open ferment to allow more ester formation.

From my understanding:

Clove (Phenolic)
A) From mashing with a ferulic acid rest
B) Supposedly cooler fermentation.

Banana (Ester)
A) From yeast, however open fermentation less CO2 to inhibit esters.
B) Supposedly warmer fermentation.
C) Multiple Generation Repitches

Adding C) thanks to you.

Fixed it.

 

[Schlenkerla]

Fixed it.

I'll pm you since this off topic.

 

[Vale71]

Agreed.

 

[Schlenkerla]

Fixed it.

Off topic.

The Head Brewer at Schneider & Sohn said they do open fermentation claiming what I said that less contained or concentrated CO2 helps with ester formation?

Do you disagree with this or is it more of justification to not change an age old process and equipment?

That's said, they have flatter fermenters with more open surface area so it's more like a bath tub verses a open conical vessel.

I'll pm you since this off topic.

Mobile PM won't send....

 

[Schlenkerla]

Any low oxygen brewers out there use dry yeast?

Do you get good results?

How do you pitch it?

Trying to get back on topic.

Fixed it.

So, if someone used the dry WB-06 or Danstar Munich. You would want to do multiple regens. Either yeasts would change with repitches?

For LOB would you pitch on a cake or prefer to yeast wash and make starters.

 

[RPh_Guy]

Faster oxygen scavenging by the yeast is the goal here, but also avoidance of off-flavors.

I guess I was hoping perhaps someone with a DO meter had monitored the oxygen level after oxygenating a direct pitch vs proper rehydration.
Direct pitch vs rehydration without oxygenating would be interesting too, but excessive residual sulfite might be a concern.

Only one of my three LOB attempts has had the epic fresh grain flavor (and also outstanding hop flavor), and that was with dry yeast rehydrated "correctly".

As I work on tightening my process I'm wondering how much of an effect this has, and which way is best.

 

[Gnomebrewer]

But one reason I don't like dry yeast is that IME I get very poor and abnormal performance in the first generation whether direct pitched, rehydrated, or propagated through a couple of starter steps. Lag times many times greater than the ~5 hours I expect with both ales and lagers pitched with liquid yeast, and abnormal attenuation, flocculation and beer pH are among these problems. I don't know why. A couple of generations in, things are fine, but I don't care to make bad beer to get to the good.

If you do find yourself needing to use dry yeast for some reason, try making a starter. It's commonly said on HBT not to use starters with dry yeast, bit is done quite often in Australia (dry yeast is quite expensive here) and works really well - I'm mostly brewing 10 to 15 gallon batches, so making a starter means I get away with one packet of dry yeast (at $7 a packet) instead of two to three. I find a similar problem as you do with direct pitching - a longer lag time and first generation beer that just doesn't quite taste right (I think it might be pH related) - but I don't have that issue when using dry yeast starters. Second and subsequent generation beers from slurry are, to my tastes, no different to liquid yeast pitches. I still mostly use liquid yeast but if it's not available will grab a packet of W34/70 or US05.

Edit: whoops, sorry, I just read that you've tried propagating through a starter. I should read more carefully!

 

[Robert65]

Yes, I've done starters with dry yeast, even 2 stage, and while it improves lag time, I still find odd attenuation (unusually high or low, strain dependent) and still the most perplexing thing: first generation dry yeast, even with a starter, results in very low beer pH (3.7-3.8, e.g., where normal performance for the strain would result in pH >4.2.) So I wouldn't be surprised if your flavor issues are in fact pH related. I really wanted to find that dry yeast would be a very convenient source for a new pitch without propping up, or at least a backup supply. But I'm just not comfortable with it.

 

[Bassman2003]

Is there some kind of middle ground between total dehydration of yeast and shipping the active liquid cultures? Would be great if there was some kind of stasis the yeast could be put in that would be somewhat temporary and protect the cells from heat/cold and really slow down the aging/dying rate. Basically put them into a coma for the homebrewer to wake them up and have a full, fresh packet of yeast.

I am getting frustrated with WL yeast behavior in the last year from my LHBS. Even when I make a starter the yeast just does not seem hungry. Just brewed with WLP001 from June and made a 2L starter the day before. There was no activity so I wound up decanting and pitching in the batch which took another 18 hours for activity. Yes, we got to the finish line but in the past, I always could make a starter the night before and have krausen by the next morning. Don't know if it is in the LHBS handling or what but kind of frustrating.

 

[brewbama]

Yes, I've done starters with dry yeast, even 2 stage, and while it improves lag time, I still find odd attenuation (unusually high or low, strain dependent) and still the most perplexing thing: first generation dry yeast, even with a starter, results in very low beer pH (3.7-3.8, e.g., where normal performance for the strain would result in pH >4.2.) So I wouldn't be surprised if your flavor issues are in fact pH related. I really wanted to find that dry yeast would be a very convenient source for a new pitch without propping up, or at least a backup supply. But I'm just not comfortable with it.

I remember we talked about it when you were going thru this but I never did understand why you were having problems. As we discussed: I don’t make starters, direct pitch and just don’t get these low pH beers or off flavors. I’ve always wondered why we have such opposing experiences with dry yeast.

At the time I recall I was having issues with sluggish fermentations with dry lager yeast but I simply increased my pitch rate to solve that problem. I now swear by the OEM recommended higher pitch rates because I get fast starts, strong ferments, and fast finishes with no off flavors or smells.

Of course, I am using 60*F now as well ...and FWIW my LOB efforts kinda suck.

 

[RPh_Guy]

If you do find yourself needing to use dry yeast for some reason, try making a starter.

For my next brew with dry yeast I will rehydrate and then use a vitality starter (4 hours on a stir plate, i.e. pitching at high kräusen).

Active yeast is a key to maintaining the grain flavor. In addition to the info put out there by Bryan et al I've definitely noticed a correlation between long lag time and oxidation in my brews.

I do aerate my batch by stirring, to at least make sure residual sulfite is removed.

 

[brewbama]

After I began direct pitching 1 gram per liter I quit experiencing log lag times.

 

[Schlenkerla]

Faster oxygen scavenging by the yeast is the goal here, but also avoidance of off-flavors.

I guess I was hoping perhaps someone with a DO meter had monitored the oxygen level after oxygenating a direct pitch vs proper rehydration.
Direct pitch vs rehydration without oxygenating would be interesting too, but excessive residual sulfite might be a concern.

Only one of my three LOB attempts has had the epic fresh grain flavor (and also outstanding hop flavor), and that was with dry yeast rehydrated "correctly".

As I work on tightening my process I'm wondering how much of an effect this has, and which way is best.

I've been doing my own vitality starter thing. I make canned starter pints from dry malt extract. Hop, then pressure cook, cool and refrigerate. Using ball or mason jars.

Before brew day remove the starter wort from the fridge the night before. Then rehydrate my yeast and pitch it to the starter. I let this run as little as 12hrs to 3 days.

Brew my LOB beer with Trifecta. Once the beer is in the fermentor, I add the yeast. Drop in my DO meter and oxygenate to about 10ppms. Which takes about 20 seconds with oxygen. Then close up everything. I fermentation purge my kegs.

If I pitched at midnight my beer is going gangbusters by 6AM. My 1.057 beers typically ferment in a day in a half to two days before I drop to a keg and spund. Here's my set up to fermentation purge and spund.

Albeit this video is not a vitality starter... It's yeast from a cultured bottle dreg made into a slurry. Whenever I do what i mention above the fermentation is really fast with air lock activity. Faster than the video shows.

 

[Schlenkerla]

Guys,

Here's a much faster fermentation gas passer.

The first it's pretty fast.

The 2nd is almost as fast with an occasional hiccup. The cuckoo clock is pretty loud comparatively to the other.

1) Using K97


2) Using WB-06