| |
Main
Date: 31 Jul 2006 17:32:12
From: Bryan M. Everitt
Subject: Re-using the trub
|
Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
ale that could use the same yeast.
Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
batches will be partial mash.
Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
--
Bryan
|
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 19:27:17
From: brewsmith
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
Bryan M. Everitt wrote:
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
> don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
> Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
> ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
> contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
> batches will be partial mash.
>
> Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
> --
> Bryan
You should get a very fast start after you siphon. I have done it in
the past and have gotten good results. Just watch out and make sure the
airlock does not get blown off. I agree with the others, no more than 3
in a row.
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 00:53:15
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 17:32:12 -0400, <beveritt@insightbb.com > wrote:
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
> don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
> Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
> ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it?
Yes, that's the easiest way to do it.
> Will it give the second batch an off flavor?
It shouldn't. I wouldn't recommend brewing something like a stout first
and then trying to reuse the yeast cake from that to make a mild ale. You
might end up with flavor from the beer carrying over. Other than that it
should work fine. Generally the recommendation is to work from lighter
style to darker/heavier style.
> I know the trub contains protein sediment as well as yeast.
It shouldn't hurt anything.
John.
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 15:24:22
From: Droopy
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
>From experience if you do that you might want to make sure you have a
route for rapid gas escape from the primary. I had a beer geyser once
from doing that.
Bryan M. Everitt wrote:
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
> don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
> Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
> ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
> contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
> batches will be partial mash.
>
> Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
> --
> Bryan
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 17:11:33
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
Bryan M. Everitt wrote:
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
> don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
> Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
> ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
> contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
> batches will be partial mash.
That will work fine. A single repitching won't cause a problem. In fact,
you're pretty much guaranteed good at least up to three if you don't go
too long in between pitches (at least with every yeast strain I've used).
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 14:50:04
From: bregent
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
In article <ZcqdnV2FDqV961PZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@insightbb.com >, Bryan M. Everitt
says...
>
>Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
>don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
>Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
>ale that could use the same yeast.
>
>Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
>on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
>contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
>batches will be partial mash.
>
>Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
To clarify things, trub is the protein break (hot and cold break) that occurs in
the kettle when the wort is heated and then cooled. It does not contain any
yeast. The sediment at the bottom of your fermenter is a combination of trub and
yeast.
You certainly can rack cooled wort directly onto the sediment of the previous
batch. But trub is something you typically don't want in the fermenter. A little
is OK and can be beneficial, but too much leads to problems. If your initial
batch did not have too much trub, go ahead and rack right onto it, otherwise,
consider a yeast washing first.
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 09:42:19
From: Jason
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
* Bryan M. Everitt <beveritt@insightbb.com >:
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast cakes,
> don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready to use
> Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after of another
> ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the trub
> contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both these
> batches will be partial mash.
>
> Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
Yes you can do that, no it shouldnt give off flavors. How many times you
can do this is a matter for great debate. I've read anywhere from 2 to
10 times. If you do resuse make yourself a blow off tube though, it gets
pretty violent and messy sometimes.
The local micro here has been using the same yeast since they started.
I dont mean washing it, I mean they scoop it out, store it,
then dump it in the next batch and they've been going for at least 5 years now.
I'm not quite that bad but I certainly use it more then 2 times I
average about 5 times before I stop. If you want it to go farther after
you make your first batch and before you pour in the wort for the second
scoop some of the yeast out and store it in a sanitized container in the
fridge.
Jason
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 15:17:43
From: Bryan M. Everitt
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
"Bryan M. Everitt" <beveritt@insightbb.com > wrote in message
news:ZcqdnV2FDqV961PZnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@insightbb.com...
> Okay, quick beginner question. I have heard of people reusing yeast
> cakes, don't know if this is what I am talking about. I am getting ready
> to use Wyeast 1056 in an ale and plan on doing another batch right after
> of another ale that could use the same yeast.
>
> Can I simply siphon my first batch off of the trub and pour the next batch
> on top of it? Will it give the second batch an off flavor? I know the
> trub contains protein sediment as well as yeast. If it matters, both
> these batches will be partial mash.
>
> Thanks for any advice/admonishments.
> --
> Bryan
>
Thanks for the responses. I think I will give it a try with at least two
batches. I have a Magic Hat #9 clone (minus the apricot extract) going
right now and want to use the same yeast for a Christmas Ale. The Christmas
Ale is much darker, so it sounds like I am set up well. If this works out
well, I'll have to try and sequence some future batches to take advantage of
it again.
Bryan
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 06:03:19
From: Scotty B
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
I have a question that follows from this discussion. I have two buckets
(one with a spigot) and two glass carboys (5 and 6.5 gal). My question
is this: If I were to try this method and I was going to do two batches
in a row, would it be alright to start in the 6.5 gal carboy, and rack
to the secondary (5 gal carboy) then do the second batch in the 6.5 gal
carboy (no secondary fermentation)? -Or- would it be best to do the
primary for both batches in a bucket and use both carboys as
secondarys?
I'm sure you're going to tell me it depends on the type(s) of beer, but
lets ignore that for the time being and just say they're both ales
(because my spare fridge is currently full).
Scotty B
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 15:18:26
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On 2 Aug 2006 06:03:19 -0700, <michaellasalle@gmail.com > wrote:
> I have a question that follows from this discussion. I have two buckets
> (one with a spigot) and two glass carboys (5 and 6.5 gal). My question
> is this: If I were to try this method and I was going to do two batches
> in a row, would it be alright to start in the 6.5 gal carboy, and rack
> to the secondary (5 gal carboy) then do the second batch in the 6.5 gal
> carboy (no secondary fermentation)? -Or- would it be best to do the
> primary for both batches in a bucket and use both carboys as
> secondarys?
You should be able to do both a primary and a secondary for each beer
using only your two carboys.
Basically, you brew the first beer and let it go through it's normal primary
fermentation in your 6.5 gallon carboy. Then, when the primary is complete
(say a week later) you rack it to the 5 gallon carboy as a secondary and brew
the second beer.
Now you have the first beer going through it's secondary fermentation in
the 5 gallon carboy and the second beer going through it's primary
fermentation in the 6.5 gallon carboy. When you bottle/keg the first
beer, you can move the second beer to the 5 gallon carboy secondary.
The only thing that could mess that up is if you want to secondary the first
beer for a really long time, say a couple months. Other than that you should
be fine leaving the second beer in the primary while the first one finishes
it's secondary. Leaving a beer in the primary for a couple weeks is not
a problem.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 08:54:15
From: Larry Bristol
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
Scotty B wrote:
> I have a question that follows from this discussion. I have two buckets
> (one with a spigot) and two glass carboys (5 and 6.5 gal). My question
> is this: If I were to try this method and I was going to do two batches
> in a row, would it be alright to start in the 6.5 gal carboy, and rack
> to the secondary (5 gal carboy) then do the second batch in the 6.5 gal
> carboy (no secondary fermentation)? -Or- would it be best to do the
> primary for both batches in a bucket and use both carboys as
> secondarys?
It probably depends on the type(s) of beer! <grin >
No, seriously, if I understand your question correctly, you are asking if it
would be OK to ferment one batch in a single fermentation vessel, without
racking it to a secondary.
Of course it would be OK. Many brewers make good beers using what is often
called a single stage fermentation system. The yeasties don't know about
these things, and will go through both the primary (aerobic) and secondary
(anaerobic) phases, whether you rack it or not.
There is something to be said for racking the beer off of the trub at some
point, although I don't see why this necessarily corresponds to the moment
that the yeast shift their activity.
--
Larry Bristol --- The Double Luck
http://www.doubleluck.com
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 15:27:35
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 08:54:15 -0500, <larry.remove@remove.doubleluck.com > wrote:
> Of course it would be OK. Many brewers make good beers using what is often
> called a single stage fermentation system. The yeasties don't know about
> these things, and will go through both the primary (aerobic) and secondary
> (anaerobic) phases, whether you rack it or not.
>
> There is something to be said for racking the beer off of the trub at some
> point, although I don't see why this necessarily corresponds to the moment
> that the yeast shift their activity.
Racking off of the sediment is mostly to prevent autolysis of the yeast. It
takes a long time for that to happen though. Leaving the beer for several
weeks in the primary is no big deal. BTW, yeast don't go through seperate
aerobic and anaerobic phases. That's not really what primary/secondary means.
There's only one fermentation, what we really are talking about is a
primary fermenter and a secondary fermenter. IE, it's the name of the
vessel, not the name of a fermentation phase.
John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 10:44:52
From: Larry Bristol
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> Racking off of the sediment is mostly to prevent autolysis of the yeast.
> It takes a long time for that to happen though. Leaving the beer for
> several weeks in the primary is no big deal.
Up to this point, I have no problem. For the rest of what you said, I'll
simply say, "No comment."
--
Larry Bristol --- The Double Luck
http://www.doubleluck.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 11:03:14
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
Larry Bristol wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>
>
>>Racking off of the sediment is mostly to prevent autolysis of the yeast.
>>It takes a long time for that to happen though. Leaving the beer for
>>several weeks in the primary is no big deal.
>
>
> Up to this point, I have no problem. For the rest of what you said, I'll
> simply say, "No comment."
>
Actually, in my experience he's basically correct -- at least provided
the temps are low (32-36F) and up to 6 weeks. Haven't tried it at
ambient temps.
Interestingly, though, I *did* have a Scottish ale yeast cake sit in the
primary fermenter during Katrina and the subsequent 4 week power outage
here. Ambient was close to 100F upstairs (where the primary was) during
the day. The interesting thing is that the yeast smelled OK when the
power finally came back on. Didn't have the testicles to actually use
it, though.
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 17:44:19
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 10:44:52 -0500, <larry.remove@remove.doubleluck.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>
>> Racking off of the sediment is mostly to prevent autolysis of the yeast.
>> It takes a long time for that to happen though. Leaving the beer for
>> several weeks in the primary is no big deal.
>
> Up to this point, I have no problem. For the rest of what you said, I'll
> simply say, "No comment."
In the presence of a high enough sugar solution, such as wort, yeast will
undergo both aerobic reproduction and anaerobic fermentation at the same
time. Primary/Secondary does not refer to a shift in phase between the two.
Even if it did, then that shift would occur at the end of the lag period,
not when you rack to secondary.
John.
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2006 14:42:40
From: Scotty B
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> ...Leaving a beer in the primary for a couple weeks is not
> a problem.
>
>
> John.
I guess my main concern (and again, depends on the types of beer, yadda
yadda) is making two types of beer and leaving the second beer to sit
on the trub from the first beer for any given amount of time more than,
say, a week or two (give or take whatever).
Scotty B
I'm probably worrying too much, I hear thats bad. <grin >
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2006 15:06:19
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On 3 Aug 2006 14:42:40 -0700, <michaellasalle@gmail.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>> ...Leaving a beer in the primary for a couple weeks is not
>> a problem.
>>
>>
>> John.
>
> I guess my main concern (and again, depends on the types of beer, yadda
> yadda) is making two types of beer and leaving the second beer to sit
> on the trub from the first beer for any given amount of time more than,
> say, a week or two (give or take whatever).
I don't think it's anything to worry about. It'll take closer to a couple
months before you really have any problems.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2006 12:12:34
From: Jason
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
Scotty B wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>
>>...Leaving a beer in the primary for a couple weeks is not
>>a problem.
>>
>>
>>John.
>
>
> I guess my main concern (and again, depends on the types of beer, yadda
> yadda) is making two types of beer and leaving the second beer to sit
> on the trub from the first beer for any given amount of time more than,
> say, a week or two (give or take whatever).
>
> Scotty B
>
> I'm probably worrying too much, I hear thats bad. <grin>
>
A week is fine and you shouldn't have any problems infact its
recommended to leave in the primary at least that long.
I've left a 2nd or 3rd batch sit in the primary for 2 weeks once with no
problems (vacation got in the way of my brewing schedule). And like I
and others have said using the yeast more then twice is fine too.
Jason
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2006 15:02:09
From: TARogue
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
I have a question about this ... With all the admonisments on keeping
things sanitized, is it really OK for me to rack ale #1 from primary to
secondary, and then just rack ale #2 from brewpot to yeastcake? Don't I
need to clean and sanitize my primary between batches?
--
TARogue (t o m (at) t a r o g u e . n e t)
Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make
much sense, but boy do we love beer!
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2006 15:14:03
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 15:02:09 +0000 (UTC), <look@my.sig > wrote:
> I have a question about this ... With all the admonisments on keeping
> things sanitized, is it really OK for me to rack ale #1 from primary to
> secondary, and then just rack ale #2 from brewpot to yeastcake? Don't I
> need to clean and sanitize my primary between batches?
Not really. If your first batch was sanitary, then there shouldn't be
anything in there that needs re-sanitizing. This is assuming that you reuse
the primary right away. If you're going to rack the first batch out and then
store the primary with the trub in it for a week before making the second
batch, then you might want to be more worried about it.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2006 10:06:56
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: Re-using the trub
|
TARogue wrote:
> I have a question about this ... With all the admonisments on keeping
> things sanitized, is it really OK for me to rack ale #1 from primary to
> secondary, and then just rack ale #2 from brewpot to yeastcake? Don't I
> need to clean and sanitize my primary between batches?
>
Absolutely not -- assuming the yeast cake has been kept sealed and
refrigerated. Bear in mind also that you'll be getting a quick start on
subsequent batches, which gives the yeast a major head start on most
other organisms.
There's actually a pretty good argument to made that at adequate
pitching levels you just need to be sure your primary is clean, with the
use of sanitizer being pretty much optional. While I *do* sanitize my
primary, my gut feeling is that this assertion is probably correct,
given adequate (commercial) pitching levels.
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
|
