One big starter or two small steps?

[Aristotle]

Hi all. I'll soon be brewing a very big imperial stout, so I'll need a lot of yeast, and I intend to get it from a single vial of white labs (wlp007). To get the required number of cells, I could either do a 3.5L starter in one go, or I could do a two-step starter, of about 1.8L each time. It got me thinking, is either of these ways preferable to the other? Or would there be no difference? I know that people often say yeast is better the second time around (after a brew), so I thought a two-step starter might be better in this respect. But then I've also heard people say that too much yeast in too little wort can inhibit growth, so a single large starter might be better in this respect. Any thoughts?

 

[trueblue]

Normally with stepped starters the general rule of thumb is the second step should be at least 5x the first i.e. first step 1lt second 5 lt. some would advocate a 10x starter. This is all from the yeast book. If 5lt is to big maybe consider a 1/2lt then up to 3.5lt?

 

[foxbat]

Two steps (at least). It's about getting the pitch rate in the right range for yeast growth. The starter calculators (like this one) will work it out for you.

 

[samale]

When making a starter are you using spray malt. Do you need different types depending on the style of beer your making. Just starting to consider liquid yeast. I plan on making a Vienna lager and maybe a Munich dunkel. I have my fridge sorted at long last so I can now start lagering

 

[trueblue]

When making a starter are you using spray malt. Do you need different types depending on the style of beer your making. Just starting to consider liquid yeast. I plan on making a Vienna lager and maybe a Munich dunkel. I have my fridge sorted at long last so I can now start lagering

Spray malt is fine.

 

[Aristotle]

Two steps (at least). It's about getting the pitch rate in the right range for yeast growth. The starter calculators (like this one) will work it out for you.

Thanks Foxbat. That starter calculator site is ace. Much better than the one I've been using! Two-step starter it is...

 

[peebee]

Easy answer: Like @foxbat says, two steps (at least). I also use the calculator Foxbat uses (the downloadable Excel spreadsheet version) 'cos it seems more versatile with a few more parameters that might help guide your choice (if they are valid parameters!). Note that "Brewunited" and "Homebrew Dad" are the same thing.

I use a minimum of two steps, not because I'm brewing high strength but because I brew twice the usual volume (45 litres, maybe 65).

Complicated answer: I'm just going through the trauma of trying to make these calculators work for me. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't! Different calculators will return different results; because they all make their own assumptions based on observed evidence plus a large dollop of guessing. I think most of the calculators work okay with yeast packs manufactured a month, maybe two, ago. After that, well the calculators keep putting out predictions and the packs appear to be within BBE dates, but in reality it's all stepped through the looking glass.

The calculators all attempt to predict viability, which is probably the most important yeast parameter. Viability, or cell count comes close, is something you can have a stab at calculating. But another very important parameter is vitality. How capable and "alive" (how much "get up and go") the yeast is and not just how much and can it stay alive. And you probably can't calculate this attribute.

As a yeast pack gets older vitality becomes more and more important. The notorious "Ringwood Ale" yeast (WYeast) often fails for people before it's three months old, yet some other yeasts go off like a bomb even when six months old.

I'm currently working with multiple steps (3 or 4) for older and notorious yeasts (starting with very small starters of 20ml or so, and only stepping up 3x volume each step or very much less). I used to give fewer steps more time (days) to get going but had it pointed out that this may not be a good approach.

 

[Aristotle]

Easy answer: Like @foxbat says, two steps (at least). I also use the calculator Foxbat uses (the downloadable Excel spreadsheet version) 'cos it seems more versatile with a few more parameters that might help guide your choice (if they are valid parameters!). Note that "Brewunited" and "Homebrew Dad" are the same thing.

I use a minimum of two steps, not because I'm brewing high strength but because I brew twice the usual volume (45 litres, maybe 65).

Complicated answer: I'm just going through the trauma of trying to make these calculators work for me. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't! Different calculators will return different results; because they all make their own assumptions based on observed evidence plus a large dollop of guessing. I think most of the calculators work okay with yeast packs manufactured a month, maybe two, ago. After that, well the calculators keep putting out predictions and the packs appear to be within BBE dates, but in reality it's all stepped through the looking glass.

The calculators all attempt to predict viability, which is probably the most important yeast parameter. Viability, or cell count comes close, is something you can have a stab at calculating. But another very important parameter is vitality. How capable and "alive" (how much "get up and go") the yeast is and not just how much and can it stay alive. And you probably can't calculate this attribute.

As a yeast pack gets older vitality becomes more and more important. The notorious "Ringwood Ale" yeast (WYeast) often fails for people before it's three months old, yet some other yeasts go off like a bomb even when six months old.

I'm currently working with multiple steps (3 or 4) for older and notorious yeasts (starting with very small starters of 20ml or so, and only stepping up 3x volume each step or very much less). I used to give fewer steps more time (days) to get going but had it pointed out that this may not be a good approach.

Woah, big batches there. I agree though: there's lots of guesswork going on. I mean, the differences between sites in the growth rate estimates is huge, and the differences of using a stir plate or no stir plate, etc. That's why I always overestimate. If I'm aiming to hit, say, 1m cells/ml/plato, I'll always go for what the calculator says will be about 1.3m or 1.4m. I figure that overpitching is far better than under pitching. I've had some pretty disastrous results with underpitching.

 

[peebee]

There's so much to mess about with with liquid yeasts. The calculators are great for giving guidance when not knowing where you are going. But you will soon develop your own preferences with time, but you've got to go with something (calculator) to get you there. Like you've already chosen to "overpitch". I perhaps "under-pitch" (not drastically, perhaps 0.6-0.7million cells/ml/plato) because it works better for some ales. But there is of course "under-pitching" as I do, and staring at a lifeless bucket like some people do.

It is all an improvement over watching the dregs from a bottle of Guinness take 5 days to spring into life before chucking it into 5 gallons of wort (back in 1970-80s, don't try it now 'cos Guinness is completely dead).