8% ABV in 6 hours

[Odin]

RO water means low calcium count means low pH buffer resulting in faster pH drop, so I don't get it.

I feel we need to perform a test to validate the findings.

Not me though.

Regards, Odin.

[hoochlover]

RO water means low calcium count means low pH buffer resulting in faster pH drop, so I don't get it.

I feel we need to perform a test to validate the findings.

Not me though.

Regards, Odin.

Hehe.

Calcium isn't the only PH buffer. But yes RO water is low in everything, mine, at least according to my tester has 1ppm total dissolved solids. As soon as the RO water is poured, stirred, etc, gases are being dissolved which is why by the time I've stirred in the sugar and whatnot the PH is down to 5.9 to 6.0 . Raised up by the yeast to 6.0 to 6.2 depending upon the stirring. The people that manufacture the yeast I use suggest the optimal starting PH for it is 6 . I don't get near 6 by anything other than by chance with what I am using. Wasn't planned that way.

There are salts in the dried yeast that quickly go into the wash from the dead yeast cells. How much buffering impact this has once they are fully dissolved I have no idea.

Per 12 grams of dried yeast, which includes live cells, so these figures are probably somewhere around 5-30% in reality once dissolved in the wash from the dead cells

Calcium 7.7mg
Iron 2.0mg
Magnesium 11.8mg
Phosphorus 155mg
Potassium 240mg
Sodium 6.0mg
Zinc 0.8mg
Copper 0.1mg
Manganese 0.1mg
Selenium 2.9mcg

You can see why if you use enough dried yeast you don't need a supplement for them. It already carries a lot that the yeast exactly need thanks to the dead cells.

[Odin]

Hoochlover, can you write down a test procedure for others to follow exactly, so they can try to duplicate your results?

Regards, Odin.

[hoochlover]

Hoochlover, can you write down a test procedure for others to follow exactly, so they can try to duplicate your results?

Regards, Odin.

For my PH results? Sure. You only need about 3 hours of time for this so I hope at least a couple people can try it for themselves.

1) Get 400ml of RO/distilled water.
2) Add 30g or 2 packed level tablespoons of normal white granulated sugar to it
3) Optional, add 1/16th (0.25g) teaspoon epsom salts for better speed and less foaming, this doesn't affect PH noticeably I've seen, at least at the start, so shouldn't matter much for PH results.
4) Ensure all ingredients are mixed, place solution in a water bath to reach 30C , or make sure the temp of this is 30C whichever way you like. Hydrometer should read around 1028 at this point. PH should be around 5.9 to 6.1 at this point.
5) Make sure the solution is 30C or just above before adding 20g instant dried yeast. If the solution is not 30C you will have increased lag time and need longer to ferment. 20g of instant dried yeast is about 1.8 packed level tablespoons. One tablespoon is 11g of yeast. mix completely. At this point PH should be around 6.0 to 6.2 depending upon (4). It will raise the PH one or two points over what (4) was.
6) In 10 minutes yeast should begin more vigorous activity, as the bubbles start being released the emulsifier starts to be released more vigorously and will float to the surface, then foaming will begin. At this point PH should be around 4.6 .
7) After 15 minutes foaming should be relatively thick, first 30 minutes will have the worst foaming so keep an eye on it. Stir it back in if it gets too big. PH at 15 min point should still be around 4.6 by 30 mins it may be a point lower.
8 ) Make sure temp stays at 30C or just above it, in 120 to 150 minutes fermentation should cease. By 180 minutes settling should be obvious.
9 ) PH should be around 4. If you degas completely it will raise a point or two. Hydrometer should read just under 1000 , completely degassing should see it around 995. ABV around 4%

You can also double the sugar to 60g for an ~8% abv and see similar PH results except fermentation will take about 6 hours instead of 2 hours.

[Odin]

Okay, I think that's a rather clear instruction, so others can redo your approach. Good starting point.

Regards, Odin.

[rad14701]

I'm still baffled regarding what you're trying to prove here... There are books and papers published about the care and feeding and mutation of yeast, written by experts in the field... You still haven't done large enough batches, let alone distilled the resulting alcohol laden wash, to determine how clean the distilled spirits may or may not be... There's more to this hobby than just fast ferments... Where is the benefit for all grain mashes, sugarhead washes, or fruit musts...??? All you're proving is that you can brute force ferment to dry rapidly - period... But we already knew that so there's really nothing earth shattering going on here... Hate to burst your bubble, but it is what it is...

[Odin]

I'm still baffled regarding what you're trying to prove here... There are books and papers published about the care and feeding and mutation of yeast, written by experts in the field... You still haven't done large enough batches, let alone distilled the resulting alcohol laden wash, to determine how clean the distilled spirits may or may not be... There's more to this hobby than just fast ferments... Where is the benefit for all grain mashes, sugarhead washes, or fruit musts...??? All you're proving is that you can brute force ferment to dry rapidly - period... But we already knew that so there's really nothing earth shattering going on here... Hate to burst your bubble, but it is what it is...

Amen Rad. That's why I want other people to replicate results. Next step should be that we ask ourselves Q's like:
1. How is the new info (when proven) applicable to home size events.

I don't see myself getting rid of excesss foam for instance. And I am sure anything above 20 liters will boil the yeast due to heating-up issues. And more.

Regards, Odin.

[hoochlover]

I'm still baffled regarding what you're trying to prove here... There are books and papers published about the care and feeding and mutation of yeast, written by experts in the field... You still haven't done large enough batches, let alone distilled the resulting alcohol laden wash, to determine how clean the distilled spirits may or may not be... There's more to this hobby than just fast ferments... Where is the benefit for all grain mashes, sugarhead washes, or fruit musts...??? All you're proving is that you can brute force ferment to dry rapidly - period... But we already knew that so there's really nothing earth shattering going on here... Hate to burst your bubble, but it is what it is...

If you already knew about ferments this fast then maybe you could explain why so many people were surprised or don't even think what I am doing is possible? I haven't read much about fast ABV ferments, at least this fast. A day or two is somewhat common to read about on distilling forums but 6 hours for 8% ABV isn't, and if it is I haven't found anything about it. If you have before maybe you could direct me to these other discussions as I would like to read them.

Which books and papers published about yeast are directly talking about fast fermentation of yeast for distilling? If you're talking about "care and feeding and mutation of yeast" when it comes to breeding yeast for reproduction then this is a separate topic, not much related to what I'm doing. If you read many of these papers on yeast like I have you would have already seen they state the reproductive cycle of yeast is what causes the majority of fusels and esters so your bafflement wouldn't exist.

In regards to fast ferments there is a reason why I'm doing them and getting the process right for what I want to do in a larger batch. I'm not going to be wasting many kg of yeast and sugar for larger batches until I know more about the process on a smaller scale. That makes sense surely? Reducing the reproductive cycle of the yeast should, if what I've read is correct, reduce the toxins which for a neutral is good.

The other washes you're talking about all have a place in distilling. As do the usual 10% TPW, and whatever else tried and true formulas exist out there. They all have a place. If you know of a paper/study/discussion that has already done what I have done and tested the batch for toxins that has somehow led you to believe what I am doing is reinventing the wheel or pointless then I'd like to read it. Otherwise I'm not sure why and how you came to your current conclusion.

[hoochlover]

Amen Rad. That's why I want other people to replicate results. Next step should be that we ask ourselves Q's like:
1. How is the new info (when proven) applicable to home size events.

I don't see myself getting rid of excesss foam for instance. And I am sure anything above 20 liters will boil the yeast due to heating-up issues. And more.

Regards, Odin.

If this does reduce toxins, which is still an if, I'm aware of this then it's something you would need to consider. Do you want to bother doing more for whatever percentage increase neutral you can get? I suspect for most people the answer is no. It's easy to throw some tomato paste, yeast, sugar in a garbage bin and come back a week or two later and run it and get your 50-75% hearts. I know this. But perhaps with certain tweaks the information could be extrapolated into less yeast, a bit longer ferments that work similar to existing fermentation setups most people use and more neutral. It's hard to know such a thing at this point.

In regards to foam it is not that difficult to reduce, a pressure fermentation will hold it back as will an internal stirring mechanism or pump that many fermentation vessels already have. It is the same with cooling. There are already vessels you can buy today which do all you need for this, and making them isn't that difficult either, if you're that way inclined. Whether it is "Worth it" for you or anyone else is an individual decision to make, but I'm already aware for most people in home distilling it is likely to not be of interest due to the extra complexity and cost even if is cleaner.

Once I'm all set up I want to do a variety of washes, like some 20% turbo yeast run, 10% tpw, 8% tpw, 5% tpw and compare them all to a fast ferment for toxins. Right now my current belief is with a good rig the benefit you may get doing what I'm doing with all this yeast at the moment is likely not to pay off or be worth it. That doesn't mean I don't think it will be cleaner, because I think it will, I just don't think it's going to be that much cleaner. But until I or someone else does it I won't know for sure.

[rad14701]

If you've read the research you would know the WHY... Trust me, you're not blazing a new trail here... The research has been done... In laboratories... By Scientists...Under laboratory conditions... And documented... There really is nothing new to know about yeast unless you are hybridizing your own strain and documenting it as such... Trust me, I was where you are some 30 years ago, thinking I was breaking new ground with regard to yeast... Back before the internet... Then I found out that actual scientists had been doing what I was trying for decades...

Whether you want to be proven right or wrong has already been done... I can do hellishly fast ferments... But I throttle them back for consistency... And the resulting spirits are far better than commercial swill... As far as refining things to the minute detail, been there done that... No scientific measurements because I do this to relax... But fast, clean, and repeatable... Do I have to ponder the WHY at this point...??? No, because I'm satisfied... And I'm satisfied with that...

Why not fixate on something more productive, like making something repeatedly drinkable...???

[Truckinbutch]

Well put , Rad .

[still_stirrin]

Well put , Rad .

+1.

[Monkeyman88]

But where does it end. If I dumped 10kg of yeast into a 50L 10% potential wash. It would be done pretty damn quick. But even a small amount of yeast can sometimes be quite noticeable in a spirit. I doubt a lot will be any good.

As with most things in this hobby. If it was economical and tasted even reasonably ok, the big commercial distilleries would be doing it already.

[Bagasso]

Hoochlover, it seems you are pretty new to distilling but you say that you have some time invested into other types of brewing. Now, I like the idea of experimenting just to check things outside the box so I won't knock what you have done here but, I do have a question, have you tasted any of the washes you have fermented with this technique?

Might not be the best way to gauge what it would produce in a still but I'm thinking that anything way off, when compared to your previous brewing experience, might be a general indicator.

Instead of spending more time tweaking the nutrient mix why not test the mix you have so far. If it turns out bad, I doubt that further tweaking the nutes is going to give you better results, tastewise.

[hoochlover]

Hoochlover, it seems you are pretty new to distilling but you say that you have some time invested into other types of brewing. Now, I like the idea of experimenting just to check things outside the box so I won't knock what you have done here but, I do have a question, have you tasted any of the washes you have fermented with this technique?

Might not be the best way to gauge what it would produce in a still but I'm thinking that anything way off, when compared to your previous brewing experience, might be a general indicator.

Instead of spending more time tweaking the nutrient mix why not test the mix you have so far. If it turns out bad, I doubt that further tweaking the nutes is going to give you better results, tastewise.

I haven't tasted it yet no, but I'm not making any claims about the taste or lack of toxins. I *believe* it should be true due to what I've read but until I've tasted a distilled batch I won't have personal experience with it, so there is a difference between a belief and scientific evidence. It's not just about taste it's about percentage of hearts too, but even my tasting/hearts cut is quite subjective. I'll probably end up getting a lab to do some tests or ring up the local uni to see if they want any tests for their gas chromograph.

As to tweaking the current mixes the main reason I'm not distilling anything yet is my lack of high quality distilling equipment, I need a new boiler and experience with my new rig before making any claims about that. I don't want to run them on my copper rig because, well it's crap in comparison.

[hoochlover]

But where does it end. If I dumped 10kg of yeast into a 50L 10% potential wash. It would be done pretty damn quick. But even a small amount of yeast can sometimes be quite noticeable in a spirit. I doubt a lot will be any good.

As with most things in this hobby. If it was economical and tasted even reasonably ok, the big commercial distilleries would be doing it already.

Good points. I'm not advising anyone to switch to high amounts of yeast, I'm just testing things and eventually I'll have some harder evidence if mainly just for myself. But if anyone likes what they are doing and are somehow offended by what I am saying I say just stick to what you know works and don't worry about this.

[raketemensch]

Well, anyone who grew up watching Mr. Wizard knows that it's fun to do experiments, whether they're fruitful or not.

I don't get the feeling that hoochlover is trying to school anyone, or invent something that mankind has never understood, it seems more like he's running some experiments with yeast because he enjoys running experiments.

Lots of people here build stills just to build stills, and barely, if ever, run them.

It doesn't matter to me if someone has discovered something before, discovering it for myself is rewarding. Almost as rewarding as looking at copper porn. I got a barrel full of corn, sugar and yeast to stabilize at 75 degrees this week with an aquarium heater. I'm far from the first to do it, but I still feel pretty good about it.

[Bagasso]

I haven't tasted it yet no, but I'm not making any claims about the taste or lack of toxins.

Maybe my question was vague. I meant clear and taste the washes.

[hoochlover]

I haven't tasted it yet no, but I'm not making any claims about the taste or lack of toxins.

Maybe my question was vague. I meant clear and taste the washes.

Ah ok sorry, no I haven't done that either. I'm still developing my clearing method, but with bentonite at least I can get it crystal clear which is a good step in direction I want to take. If I couldn't get the yeast out of the wash within a couple hours I would feel like the test wasn't complete.

I'm nearly ready now to run a bigger ferment, just need to get my rig set up so I can process it.

[Bagasso]

Ah ok sorry, no I haven't done that either.

I just figured that since you have experience with other fermentation products you would be able to give a clear wash a sip and detect any major flaws.

[hoochlover]

Ah ok sorry, no I haven't done that either.

I just figured that since you have experience with other fermentation products you would be able to give a clear wash a sip and detect any major flaws.

Beers/wines/cidars have a lot of flavor that can easily mask any other things that are in there. Wouldn't really be a fair comparison. And when it comes to sugar washes I haven't the years of experience you probably need to know such things. Due to my newness to distilling I feel the best way to know what I want is to have the samples analyzed by someone else and get real data. Until that is done or I have a lot more experience I think I can't make that many actual conclusions for myself. So I'll keep going along with my new rig and do a lot of distilling and see where it gets me.

I've learnt a great deal about yeast doing about 60-70 tests in the span of 5 weeks. If I can hit the same intensity with distilling I may be able to speed up the experience with that too and be able to draw more conclusions. Until I have actual hard data that I can share I don't expect anyone else to care that much about my subjective tests. I hope if others can do similar tests, especially those with great neutral rigs and more experience (dad300, odin, manu etc) , that we could know more anecdotally speaking even if we don't get those gas chromo tests just yet.

[Bagasso]

Until I have actual hard data that I can share I don't expect anyone else to care that much about my subjective tests.

Been coming to HD for about 8 years, registered 6 years ago. I think I have seen 3 lab results in that time. Subjective tests are the norm around here.

This is from the parent site:

Higher than 4 grams per gallon will get you some sulfur flavors that can be hard to get rid of, so only use the 100 grams of dry yeast per 5 gallons (20 litres) rule for a pure sugar mash that is destined to be carbon polished and turned into vodka or a "base spirit" for liqueurs, etc.

If this is true then, the amount of yeast you are using is sure to stand out in any type of fermented drink. Then again it could be wrong but, I understand that some people need to do things a certain way. Do your thing. We'll get the results sooner or later.

ETA: Just caught the error in the quote above but, because of some legal agreement, IIRC, the parent site can't be edited. 4 grams per gallon would mean 20 grams for 5 gallons of wash. Here I thought I was pitching half the recommended limit and I was pitching more than twice.

[hoochlover]

Until I have actual hard data that I can share I don't expect anyone else to care that much about my subjective tests.

Been coming to HD for about 8 years, registered 6 years ago. I think I have seen 3 lab results in that time. Subjective tests are the norm around here.

This is from the parent site:

Higher than 4 grams per gallon will get you some sulfur flavors that can be hard to get rid of, so only use the 100 grams of dry yeast per 5 gallons (20 litres) rule for a pure sugar mash that is destined to be carbon polished and turned into vodka or a "base spirit" for liqueurs, etc.

If this is true then, the amount of yeast you are using is sure to stand out in any type of fermented drink. Then again it could be wrong but, I understand that some people need to do things a certain way. Do your thing. We'll get the results sooner or later.

I have definitely smelt increased sulfur in some batches compared to anything else I've ever done before these tests. It's a lot to do with temp, or at least it's more obvious with temp to me. However, and this surprised me somewhat, after fermentation finished and some time passed the smell went away even on the foulest smelling things. I suspect little remains in the solution and the gas simply goes away, at least in an open fermentation. In a closed fermentation this may be more difficult, I haven't done a closed fermentation for some weeks but do remember them smelling foul after fermenting finished.

I doubt however that the sulfur is actually increased that much in a fast brew by itself. I think it is compressed into a shorter time, hence way way more obvious, but why should there be more sulfur released because there is more starting yeast? The only thing I could think of that may make this happen is the dried yeast itself contains something which helps the yeast lead to that pathway. After all we know with other things like turbo yeast that the extra nutrients do indeed make it more foul.And it could be the same with dried yeast when you use so much, you're simply putting too much nutrients in there (the dead yeast) than the live yeast actually need because you have so many. So there is definitely some scientific reasoning behind why this may happen and I wouldn't be willing to throw out this possibility even though its just anecdotal.

There is a way to avoid this if it is indeed a problem and it involves cleaning the dried yeast before use. This would roughly involve putting a minor amount of sugar in a large wash (similar to what you'll end up using to avoid the cell density problem). In about 15-30 mins the yeast will have consumed the sugar and start to settle out. Obviously a flat fermentation vessel would be ideal for speed reasons. If you just put the dried yeast in without sugar not all the emulsifier will be released which is another contaminant you want to remove to reduce foaming and toxins. It seems that until CO2 is released a lot of the emulsifier hangs around in micro amounts attached to clumps of dead yeast cells. You need to get some CO2 popping out to release this and release the dead cells better which will aid in cleaning the wash.

I've cleaned dried yeast before to remove the yellowish-orange taint that comes with dead yeast in the dried yeast. This taint is likely, though not verified by any scientific means the lipids (fats) from the dead cells which roughly make up 8% of the weight of yeast. Dried yeast amount has a linear correlation with taint amount. Epsom salts also seems to increase the taint so it could be having some effect on drawing out the inner yeast contents due to the osmotic imbalances. The reason I think it's likely lipids tainting the wash is the fact yeast lipids are mainly palmitic and stearic acid and the taint color is exactly something approaching this. When the emulsifier breaks down thanks to ethanol it also releases stearic acid and sorbitol which likely further taints it, more dried yeast = more emulsifier too. Anyone with more knowledge on the subject I hope can add more detail to this or correct me if I'm wrong. This taint does not disappear after fermenting is finished which proves that it is not being used by the yeast in any large amount and is unneeded when the yeast pitching amount approaches the cell density the yeast likes. These lipids would only be useful if you needed yeast reproduction to occur to hit the desired cell density, which for any wash (TPW, etc) I've seen is 100% required.

I've only done a couple tests with washing dried yeast and from those couple tests I have found that it impacts the performance negatively by some amount. I think this is due to the yeast lag effect, when yeast go dormant due to utilizing all resources, or for temperature reasons, there is a severe lag in coming back compared to dropping dried yeast in there. I'm not really sure why dried yeast dumping is less laggy than yeast already in solution at ideal temperatures but that is dormant. The yeast should conserve enough energy to remain dormant for some time and not die, but coming out of that phase seems worse when it's in solution than dried. But until I actually have hard numbers to compare it's probably not worth going too further with theories on this.

*****

tldr: It's not proven yet that lots of dried yeast contribute to more sulfur compounds being released, but it is certainly possible due to the potential for excessive nutrients being in solution and somehow changing pathways of the yeast compared to a lower dried yeast start. Given what people are dumping into their washes though I somehow feel that there is little difference in the real world, but no evidence to back up this theory. "Live" yeast is different due to lack of excess nutrients in the solution, and if pitched at the optimal cell density for the solution should result in the lowest toxins of all kinds being produced. Over or under pitching will start to increase the toxins, and it would look a lot like an inverted bell curve.

[masonsjax]

Head over to homebrewtalk.com and read the yeast forums. Get Chris White's book "Yeast". The beer guys have been doing these kinds of experiments for a long time. No need to make guesses and reinvent the wheel. Unless you just want to do it for fun of course.

[hoochlover]

Head over to homebrewtalk.com and read the yeast forums. Get Chris White's book "Yeast". The beer guys have been doing these kinds of experiments for a long time. No need to make guesses and reinvent the wheel. Unless you just want to do it for fun of course.

I already have the book and beer yeast information has little to do with distilling. Beer and wine need lag periods and yeast reproduction, ie toxin creation, to have flavor. Without it they have little flavor and are undrinkable to most people. But thank you for your suggestion anyhow, it's a good book about yeast as it relates to beer and I'd recommend anyone who reads this thread to buy it and read that book too.

Just don't get fooled into thinking beer yeast pitching information has much to do with sugar washes and neutral creations, because they aren't very similar. Even though a lot of the well known distilling sugar washes seem heavily influenced by beer and wine information.

[rad14701]

Yeast has no way of knowing that is fermenting beer, wine, or wash for distillation... All it does is convert sugar into alcohol and CO2, plus a few other minor byproducts... And all ferments rely on basically the same yeast density... You should have gleaned this from your previous research... And that should have also made you aware that your drastic over-pitching has no real positive benefits...

Have you even gone so far as to analyze yeast samples from your experiments using a microscope in an effort to distinguish healthy cell counts compared to dead cell counts, differences in motility, other generated compounds, etc...??? If you're going to try to talk all scientific then you should be using scientific protocols and practices... To date all you've managed to do is keep yourself amused rather than moving ahead in this fine hobby of home distillation... I sure hope you aren't planning on being this anal with every other aspect along the way...

Three pages in and thus far you've not really presented anything worthy of anyones interest... It's mildly entertaining, and frustrating the same time at, to read your follies, but little more than that... I'm still seeing this as an exercise in futility with minor bits and pieces of the science established by others tossed in here and there without actual correlation or validation...

This is coming from someone who was even more fixated than you about yeast some 30+ years ago... I was in far deeper and eventually discovered that all I had been doing was wasting time keeping only myself entertained while breaking no new ground... I wasted a lot of time watching yeast through a microscope... You, on the other hand, at least have a bit of an audience watching you stumble along somewhat aimlessly...

Move on... It's yeast... Just pitch somewhat adequate amounts, as determined by real scientists in real laboratories, and let it do its thing while you enjoy other facets of this hobby or the rest of your life... It's not like you have a goal of hybridizing your own yeast strain for a specific purpose or anything...

I use Fleischmann's Dry Active Yeast... I trend to over-pitch most of the time, but not to the extreme... I can keep it in either the refrigerator or freezer for over two years and it retains its potency... It ferments my washes to dry with minimal issues over the course of many many ferments... It's plentiful and cheap... That's all I need to know about yeast these days...

[hoochlover]

rad I'm not sure if I'm reading your post correctly but I do have a feeling you are bothered by what I am posting or taking offense to something. I asked you some questions before to clear up some of your statements you were making and you didn't give me the courtesy of answering them. I hope you can if you have the time, I'm aware you think I'm repeating tests everyone has already done before which is why I wanted to know the research you were claiming had already been done so I could look at it instead of possibly doing it myself. I have done a lot of research on yeast and some of the stuff I am doing I have not found answers to before, at least on the internet and the books I have read. But you are probably older, wiser than me and have more experience it seems on yeast so if you could help pass on that information I would appreciate it.

Yeast has no way of knowing that is fermenting beer, wine, or wash for distillation... All it does is convert sugar into alcohol and CO2, plus a few other minor byproducts... And all ferments rely on basically the same yeast density... You should have gleaned this from your previous research... And that should have also made you aware that your drastic over-pitching has no real positive benefits...

This is a very simplified look at the fermentation process. If it were this simple there would not be wine yeasts, cidar yeasts, beer yeasts, bakers yeast, spirit yeasts, different fermenting processes for wine, cidars, beers, etc. You're aware the lag and reproductive phase of the yeast is what contributes most to toxin and flavor count right? So varying that does have drastic effects on taste, speed and toxins. As does the yeast strain. I'm not sure why you're trying to simplify this down to "its yeast and it farts out CO2 and alcohol what more do you need to know". Well I've already stated a few times in this thread what I want to know and it's not this simple.

Taking a beer fermentation process and applying it to wine is stupid. The same with a wine process to beer. The same with a cidar process to either of them. The same as it is with distilling. There are many differences, so it is factually incorrect to state they are all the same because the yeast doesn't know whether it's in beer/wine/sugar wash. Just because the yeast isn't a conscious being able to know it's fermenting beer and should be farting out beer flavor doesn't make it simple. The fact is it's controlled by the person doing the wash and has a considerable, not minor, impact on the final product.

Even if there is no real reduction in the toxin count there is still a place for fermenting a 10% wash in 10 hours and distilling it within 12. There is 100% a place for this because time matters to some people. Even if you think this is stupid, which is your right because it's subjective, fast ferments will always have a place in the world of distilling even if they have higher toxin counts, not less like I believe in some instances.

Have you even gone so far as to analyze yeast samples from your experiments using a microscope in an effort to distinguish healthy cell counts compared to dead cell counts, differences in motility, other generated compounds, etc...??? If you're going to try to talk all scientific then you should be using scientific protocols and practices... To date all you've managed to do is keep yourself amused rather than moving ahead in this fine hobby of home distillation... I sure hope you aren't planning on being this anal with every other aspect along the way...

Three pages in and thus far you've not really presented anything worthy of anyones interest... It's mildly entertaining, and frustrating the same time at, to read your follies, but little more than that... I'm still seeing this as an exercise in futility with minor bits and pieces of the science established by others tossed in here and there without actual correlation or validation...

This is coming from someone who was even more fixated than you about yeast some 30+ years ago... I was in far deeper and eventually discovered that all I had been doing was wasting time keeping only myself entertained while breaking no new ground... I wasted a lot of time watching yeast through a microscope... You, on the other hand, at least have a bit of an audience watching you stumble along somewhat aimlessly...

Move on... It's yeast... Just pitch somewhat adequate amounts, as determined by real scientists in real laboratories, and let it do its thing while you enjoy other facets of this hobby or the rest of your life... It's not like you have a goal of hybridizing your own yeast strain for a specific purpose or anything...

I can certainly understand your opinion about "its yeast just move on" as I've felt that way sometimes too. Like what is the point here when the alternative isn't even that bad. A one week TPW isn't that bad, I know this already. But I am doing it more for my curious mind, and perhaps I will run out of motivation like it appears you did many moons ago.

I use Fleischmann's Dry Active Yeast... I trend to over-pitch most of the time, but not to the extreme... I can keep it in either the refrigerator or freezer for over two years and it retains its potency... It ferments my washes to dry with minimal issues over the course of many many ferments... It's plentiful and cheap... That's all I need to know about yeast these days...

And perhaps this will be me soon too, I actually prefer the lazy option whenever possible especially for an ongoing chore. Right now I have some questions about yeast which are sprinkled throughout this thread and 2 other ones on this forum, especially as it ascertains to neutrals and if you have that information I would really appreciate it as I wouldn't have to do it myself. I keep getting this impression you are laughing at me because you know things I don't, refuse to pass them on to me whilst simultaneously implying I'm an idiot for doing tests myself. Its not a very friendly thing to do.

[Ginrummy]

Admin Edit Sorry folks once again InglisHill has trolled on our site with differnt ID.You would think a admin from another site would not act so childlike and do this .This will be 4th time Ive banned him ..

[masonsjax]

What exactly do you mean by "toxins"? I've been making beer for a long time and I don't believe I've ever tried to produce any toxins in my beer.

A lag phase is not needed for beer/wine, and a lot of people have spent a lot of effort trying to eliminate lag and ester production actually. Personally, I make "clean" beers most of the time, and they are very drinkable. The pitching techniques I use make a very consistent, quality product, with yeast choice influencing some of the characteristic contributions such as esters, phenols, ABV balance, mouthfeel, etc.

There is a sweet spot when it comes to pitching rate, and it is certainly not more is better, regardless of whether the final product will be consumed as beer or distilled to something else. It's not super clear to me what your goals are, but you are absolutely treading on ground that's been covered and is already well understood.

[hoochlover]

What exactly do you mean by "toxins"? I've been making beer for a long time and I don't believe I've ever tried to produce any toxins in my beer.

When it comes to a neutral it's anything but ethanol, and I suppose water.

A lag phase is not needed for beer/wine, and a lot of people have spent a lot of effort trying to eliminate lag and ester production actually. Personally, I make "clean" beers most of the time, and they are very drinkable. The pitching techniques I use make a very consistent, quality product, with yeast choice influencing some of the characteristic contributions such as esters, phenols, ABV balance, mouthfeel, etc.

How long is your lag phase?

There is a sweet spot when it comes to pitching rate, and it is certainly not more is better, regardless of whether the final product will be consumed as beer or distilled to something else. It's not super clear to me what your goals are, but you are absolutely treading on ground that's been covered and is already well understood.

What evidence are you using to support this opinion? I know from my research there are certainly at least a few studies/papers/books about beer and wine and the role yeast has on flavor. When it comes to distilling there certainly is quite the lack of information, especially for neutrals. But if you have the information/research then I'd be happy to read it.

I'm sorry it's not clear what my goals are, it's to produce a clear as possible wash that results in the most ethanol and the least amount of toxins. So that when you distil it there is the minimal amount of toxins in the distillate.

So basically if you have research that shows that the amount of yeast I'm pitching increases the toxin count by itself then that information would be very helpful, thanks.

If you want a head start on this then refer to perhaps Chris White, the yeast guy from whitelabs.

Pitch rates, in addition to strain, temperature, and gravity, make a dramatic difference in the final flavor and aroma profile of any beer. The pitch rate will have a direct effect on the amount of cell growth during a fermentation. Cell growth decreases as pitch rates increase. Ester production is directly related to yeast growth as are most other flavor and aroma compounds.

High pitch rates can lead to:
Very low ester production
Very fast fermentations
Thin or lacking body/mouthfeel
Autolysis (Yeasty flavors due to lysing of cells)

You can see that all but the last one are actually great for a low toxin brew and autolysis can be controlled to a large extent. But if you have this contrary evidence I would love to see it. I asked rad a couple days ago and he hasn't yet submitted any. I'm not sure where you guys are getting your information but I have been unable to find it.