White Labs....losing faith

Yakima 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
J

JONNYROTTEN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,053
Reaction score
1,334
Location
Long Island
My experiment might be a bust. I also think I'm done with White Labs yeast. Split batch one with 34/70 one with WLP840

This is the second time I've tried this experiment with the same results.
Everything is identical, in the same chamber with the same temps...everything.

The well over a month 34/70 slurry has been cranking away since yesterday.
Now going on 70 hours from pitching the WL840 is doing absolutely nothing. No foam forming....nothing..looks like brown water.

I didn't make a starter but pitched 2 packs in a 1.038 beer which should be more than plenty.
I just pulled the bucket out of the fermenter to warm it up for a day to see if I can jump start it a bit.

The yeast was sent to me for free after having the exact same problem the last time I tried this experiment. I was looking forward to trying the 840 for an American lager like BMC.

Any idea what the issue is besides crappy yeast...or what to do?
 
Where are you getting your White Labs yeast? Was it in a small white pouch or did it come in a plastic vial ? How old is the yeast?

White Labs produces great yeast products so I am wondering if you get yours from a place that doesn't treat their yeast well or is selling expired product.
 
Well, performance-wise (speed of ferment, attenuation, forgiving in a wide range of temps) you really can't compare many lager yeasts to 34/70. It will reliably perform well. So well that it might as well be an ale yeast.

What it lacks, however, is the finer subtleties of a good liquid yeast.

I have always had good experience with White Labs (I've been using them, though not exclusively, for 15+ years).

Where are you getting your yeast from? I suspect your supplier is not taking good care of them, and would sitch your supplier before abandoning the brand. That said, there are plenty of other great brands out there. I use White Labs probably 60% of the time, Wyeast maybe 30%, and others maybe 10%. I always keep a few packets of 34/70 around though.
 
The first time I tried this experiment I got the WL from my LHBS.It was nearing expiration so I chalked it up to old yeast.

WL sent my 2 new packs directly from themselves.
Exp: July 25

I was home when it showed up and it was still cold in ice packs. I immediately put it in the fridge.

Not in a vial in the newer pitch packs.

How long should I wait before giving up on it and pitching 34/70?

Again I took it out of the chamber to warm it up. I also pitched at around 65 to jump start it as recommended by WL and brought it down to 50 overnight
 
Have you checked the gravitates yet? If not I would and see if the white labs is actually not fermenting instead of pitching a different yeast and assuming the white labs vial sent directly to you from them was bad. I think they'd want to know they're shipping bad yeast and ask for the lot number so they could avoid a huge problem.
 
I've used White Lab's yeasts once. I don't like the delivery system in comparison to Wyeast's, so I have never gone back.
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
The well over a month 34/70 slurry has been cranking away since yesterday.
Now going on 36 hours from pitching the WL840 is doing absolutely nothing. No foam forming....nothing..looks like brown water.
Click to expand...
I think this is a slightly unfair comparison between these two pitches and yeasts. All my slurry pitches take off like gang busters. Even with a proper made starter I don't raise an eyebrow until at least 48 hours at lager temperatures. Sometimes I see signs earlier sometimes it takes a while longer, but have never had any WL yeast fail to do the job. Trust the yeast.

JONNYROTTEN said:
I didn't make a starter but pitched 2 packs in a 1.038 beer which should be more than plenty.
I just pulled the bucket out of the fermenter to warm it up for a day to see if I can jump start it a bit.
Click to expand...
What size batch? A quick calculation for 5 gallons you'd need 270 billion cells. With the expiration date stated you pitched roughy 125b and you are still slightly under pitched for 2.5 gallons. Put it back in the chamber and trust the yeast to do the job.

JONNYROTTEN said:
Any idea what the issue is besides crappy yeast...or what to do?
Click to expand...
RDWHAHB :mug:
 
Ok I'll give it more time..I don't want to push it and get an infection but thinking about it the chamber is completely full of co2 from the other fermenting bucket so I should be good.

WL says one packet is good for 5 gallons in anything under 1.040 and I pitched 2 packets in an 1.038 beer so I thought I would be more than fine on the cell count?

Even with the expiration date given I thought I would be good with a double pitch...maybe not
 
Wow, I haven't had problems (I rarely lager) even with WL yeast that is a little expired. Though, the times I have lagered activity wasn't very apparent though it was actively fermenting.
Good thing you have the dry yeast on hand for backup, Mr. J.R.
 
I'm retracting my statement....with no disrespect towards White labs...I just checked and after 2 hours from my post I have a nice white foam layer on the beer..It took 70 hours but its going.

I mentioned 36 hours for some reason and that was a mistake. Its been 3 days....70 hours from pitching...and the reason for my concern
 
I have never had an issue with White Labs when fermenting in a carboy, I did however have some issues with how long it was taking to get going in a pail. When I switched to carboys, everything I have brewed started fermenting in 6 to 8 hours.
 
DrunkenCanuck said:
I have never had an issue with White Labs when fermenting in a carboy, I did however have some issues with how long it was taking to get going in a pail. When I switched to carboys, everything I have brewed started fermenting in 6 to 8 hours.
Click to expand...

The vessel should have absolutely nothing to do with how well a fermentation goes. Wort is wort. The yeast don't care what kind of vessel it is in!!!
 
You did the right thing pitching two packs, but that may not have been enough for a lager... 1038 or not. Check a calculator to be sure.

I always make a starter with liquid yeast. Helps you gauge the performance of the yeast and freshly "starterted" yeast always takes off within a half a day or less.
 
If you want a quick take off, you need a large pitch with a fresh starter. Lager yeasts doubly so.

I've never had good experiences with direct pitches... especially if the yeast was over a few weeks old. It's dormant after all so it needs time to wake back up. Give it a head start!
 
Your White Labs batch was WAY way under pitched. Is that yeast 4 months old? Viability has dramatically dropped by then. Also lagers need more yeast than ales.

You really should make a starter when using liquid yeast. Use one of the many pitching rate calculators to help.
 
hvjackson said:
Your White Labs batch was WAY way under pitched. Is that yeast 4 months old? Viability has dramatically dropped by then. Also lagers need more yeast than ales.

You really should make a starter when using liquid yeast. Use one of the many pitching rate calculators to help.
Click to expand...
Looking at Mrmalty it looks like I only needed 32 packets LOL

Is that even possible? I put in a production date of 1/25/2017
 
Since having access to well stored and fresh White Labs Pure Pitch packets, my stirplate and flask have started feeling neglected. When someone comments on how high my attenuation rates are I know its a benefit of using the Pure Pitch packets.
 
BrunDog said:
You did the right thing pitching two packs, but that may not have been enough for a lager... 1038 or not. Check a calculator to be sure.

I always make a starter with liquid yeast. Helps you gauge the performance of the yeast and freshly "starterted" yeast always takes off within a half a day or less.
Click to expand...

Gordon Strong has claimed that he often makes lagers with only a single smack pack. Being a 4 time Ninkasi winner he should know about making good beer, so how can he make a good lager with only a single smack pack when the rest of us poor shmucks have to use a 2 liter starter? Think about the conditions that he creates in the wort and duplicate it.
 
Temperature control in the growth phase through active fermentation is everything for controlling off-flavors from yeast, assuming they have enough oxygen and nutrients. Keep the wort temperature (not room, chamber or bucket wall temperature) under tight control, and under-pitches shouldn't be _too_ much of an issue.

This is a bit like mash conversion efficiency - if everything else is close to optimum, one parameter being off doesn't matter too much. This is also why most of the Brulosophy experiments produce null results, by the way - they only take one parameter outside optimum values at a time.
 
FWIW I just took a sample from each batch.

The 34/70 looks done and hit 1.004
The WPL840 is at 1.024 and has thick Krausen

I will say my 9:00 AM small tasting tells me I'm liking the 840. The 34/70 has that German taste (as intended) but the 840 has none of that and is super clean with that apple tart I like.
REALLY looking forward to this one!!
Might just be the ultimate lawnmower beer!
 
The other nice thing about the split batch is if I come up short on the 840 I know its not the grain and I burned out the yeast with an underpitch and if I hit the same or close as the 34/70 I know I pitched enough for next time
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
So what are the conditions? The only thing I can think of is aeration that I'm not convinced makes a difference.
Click to expand...

Gordon didn't say but since the people who brew high gravity beers seem to think that an oxygenation system is a good idea, that's where I'd start. After all, you make a starter on a stir plate to get good growth. That stirring must be adding something to make the yeast grow and since all you use for a growth medium is wort via DME, you are basically growing them in beer that is aerated..
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
Looking at Mrmalty it looks like I only needed 32 packets LOL

Is that even possible? I put in a production date of 1/25/2017
Click to expand...

Why that date. If WL sent you packs that have a July use by date on them they should not be that old. I would suspect only a couple of weeks.

MrMalty is getting dated as far as yeast viability. I suspect that viability loss is a lot less these days. It is also conservative, asking for more than is needed.

Also, I checked MrMalty and used your date, lager and 5.25 gallons. It gave me 10 packs...

I used 2 weeks old, and it said to use 2 packs.
 
kh54s10 said:
Why that date. If WL sent you packs that have a July use by date on them they should not be that old. I would suspect only a couple of weeks.

MrMalty is getting dated as far as yeast viability. I suspect that viability loss is a lot less these days. It is also conservative, asking for more than is needed.

Also, I checked MrMalty and used your date, lager and 5.25 gallons. It gave me 10 packs...

I used 2 weeks old, and it said to use 2 packs.
Click to expand...
MFG: Jan 26 2017
Best by July 25 2017

I put in Jan 25 liquid yeast with 6 gallons and it said 32 packets.
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
MFG: Jan 26 2017
Best by July 25 2017

I put in Jan 25 liquid yeast with 6 gallons and it said 32 packets.
Click to expand...

OOPS, I looked at the wrong line. I looked at packs for a starter, not the line for packs needed without a starter. It does indeed say 32 packs. With the growth factor slider set all the way to the right (larger starter) it says 6 packs to make a 4.2 liter starter on a stir plate.

I now use this calculator: http://www.yeastcalculator.com/

I ran the numbers there and it says to use 10 packs.

If you continue to do lagers, I suggest a stirplate and making properly sized starters. It is a lot less expensive than buying multiple packs.

I have done lagers and used step starters, so the final pitch was from a 2 liter step, starting from only one pack. With the starter my fermentation started in less that 12 hours.

When making starters the longest lag time I have had was from 5pm on brew day until I looked at 10pm the next day. It had already started, so less than 17 hours.

How bad the off flavors? You have just made an experiment to find out!

I am surprised they sent such old yeast packs for a replacement. Maybe they don't propagate this strain that often?? I would think as a customer service they would want to send the freshest that they have so that you have the best chance of no further problems.
 
RM-MN said:
Gordon Strong has claimed that he often makes lagers with only a single smack pack. Being a 4 time Ninkasi winner he should know about making good beer, so how can he make a good lager with only a single smack pack when the rest of us poor shmucks have to use a 2 liter starter? Think about the conditions that he creates in the wort and duplicate it.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this? Maybe he's changed his routine but in his 2011 book Brewing Better Beer he says if he's using new yeast he always makes a starter.
 
My take-aways from this thread.

A slurry is usually more active and quicker than a fresh pitch even with a starter for some reason. So the difference in lag time is normal.
Given the date of the WL yeast it is not at all surprising that there was a long lag time. As is the severe underpitch.
The cell counts of the 2 pitches were not equal so the comparison is invalid.
And if any criticism is due to WL it is the date of the replacement packs.
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
If 2 packs get me to FG with no off flavors in a super light easily detectable lager and Mr Malty is calling for 32 packs I'll consider Mr Malty udderly useless.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article I linked to in post #20? It isn't that Mr. Malty is getting dated, it's that we homebrewers are not using it as intended.
 
hvjackson said:
Do you have a source for this? Maybe he's changed his routine but in his 2011 book Brewing Better Beer he says if he's using new yeast he always makes a starter.
Click to expand...

I've looked this up 3 times and didn't bookmark it as I thought it would never come up again. It was on the web and was hard to find each time. I believe it was from a blog post. It's your turn to look it up.
 
End of January mfg date? That explains the slowness. I think it's ok to use yeast that old but not without a starter to build the numbers and tell you where the yeast health is.

I have used yeast that was dated ok and believed to be handled appropriately, only the find the starter did nothing after almost 3 days. Chucked that bad boy and saved me the aggravation.

Also I know dry yeast is popular but I don't personally have any love for it. Even rehydrated properly, the lag time makes me uncomfortable. Not founded or a real reason to worry, but that's just me - I like a quick blast off!
 
BrunDog said:
End of January mfg date? That explains the slowness. I think it's ok to use yeast that old but not without a starter to build the numbers and tell you where the yeast health is.

I have used yeast that was dated ok and believed to be handled appropriately, only the find the starter did nothing after almost 3 days. Chucked that bad boy and saved me the aggravation.

Also I know dry yeast is popular but I don't personally have any love for it. Even rehydrated properly, the lag time makes me uncomfortable. Not founded or a real reason to worry, but that's just me - I like a quick blast off!
Click to expand...

I have never had a starter not start. Maybe I am lucky. I have only bought liquid yeast online in the spring and fall so heat or cold was not a big concern. In the summer and winter I only use liquid yeast bought at my LHBS. 93 beers and a dozen wines.

When making a starter or using rehydrated dry yeast I don't get a significant difference in lag time or performance. Both will start quickly, my longest lag time ever was less than 17 hours. Almost every time I pitch in the late afternoon and have good action by morning. Sometimes in less than 4 hours with either liquid or dry.
 
BrunDog said:
I'm gonna go ahead and throw a shenanigans card on the "4 hours dry" claim!
Click to expand...

Yah I've never even seen a properly rehydrated fresh pack of dry ale yeast take off in better than 36 hours. I'm calling BS on this claim too.

Maybe if you pitch a packet to a 1.035 1G batch at 90F?
 
Normally I use slurries but my last batch (3 days ago) I pitched a room temp pack of unrhydrated 05 at 7:00 PM in 5 gallons at 68 and when I woke up the next morning it was crankin away...not even close to just starting at 24 hours....I've had the same yeast take much longer but to say its not possible is wrong....yeast be some strange little animals
 
BrunDog said:
I'm gonna go ahead and throw a shenanigans card on the "4 hours dry" claim!
Click to expand...

schematix said:
Yah I've never even seen a properly rehydrated fresh pack of dry ale yeast take off in better than 36 hours. I'm

Maybe if you pitch a packet to a 1.035 1G batch at 90F?
Click to expand...

Go ahead and call me a liar. But it is true that I have never had a fermentation take longer than 17 hours to start. And I have had some start as quick as four hours.

OK, I don't know if those were the rehydrated or the liquid yeast brews. But still it shouldn't be taking days for fermentations to start!

If it is taking your dry yeasts 36 hours to start you are doing something wrong!

Or I am doing things a lot better than you are!
 

Similar threads

DevilsCups
What's the deal with White Labs London Fog pitch rate?
Replies
7
Views
581
DevilsCups
DevilsCups
Bramling Cross
APEX San Diego...WTF?
Replies
38
Views
2K
BrewnWKopperKat
BrewnWKopperKat
F
Liquid yeast - am I missing something?
2 3
Replies
98
Views
4K
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
H
Yeast starter not starting
Replies
16
Views
1K
HB2112
H
M
Lager yeast fermentation not starting
Replies
6
Views
990
miro sep
M
Williams Brewing 300

Latest posts

Back
Top