Thanks for the clarification.
MouseInCA wrote:added a secondary rinse of the yeast to ensure that I got all of the best of the yeast.
Without a good amount of experience or a methylene stain, it's rather difficult to know if you actually did leave behind the 'best' yeast in your sample. It's something I've learned to eyeball, but it's still not easy. I tend to over rinse & build back up with starters, but even then it's easy to miss that right 'cut'. Not saying you did or didn't, but don't make the assumption.
animaldoc wrote:You're not going to get the density of a White Labs tube -- that is very densely cultured and I suspect packed with some sort of centrifuge process to maximize yeast and minimize liquid.
Absolutely. They do in fact use a centrifuge. If you want to see the difference between a regular floc & how far they compress theirs, shake up a tube & pitch it into a few hundred mL of rinse water. Swirl it up & let it floc out. There's a lot more in that tube than you'd expect. I read the original post as 'this yeast didn't settle out after rinsing like a WLP yeast floc'd after rinsing'. If it indeed was comparing to a rinsed sample having the same density as a fresh tube, you'll never get there.
animaldoc wrote: Then there is the question as to "why" ...... if the US05 worked well, why wouldn't you expect the next pack you get to work well? When you are using dry yeast the economics don't make sense to make starters or save/culture/repitch etc. I don't just mean price, but your time and the risk of introducing contamination with each transfer, pitch, and ferment.
If the answer is "because I want to do it" ....... great! have fun!
This was my assumption. It's not a good idea if your goal is to save money. If that first pitch worked so much better than every other pitch of US-05, my first guess wouldn't be the yeast. The dry strains are pretty consistent. I would look more at what kind of nutrients, grain bill, O2 concentration and pitch rate.
MouseInCA wrote:When I say that it is fluid, I imagine the best way to look at it is heavy oil in water. If I tip the jar the yeast slides easily and will slos0h against the side of the jar, is easily mixed into the water on top of it, but nothing packs together. I will just make a starter, decant the water and see how it does.
It really depends on how long it's been settled as well. If you were checking it out immediately after it stratified, it's going to be less dense & more easily disturbed than after 36 hours. 24-36 hours seems to be when the strains that I've worked with seem to become a bit more stable although it will continue to compact slightly over the course of the next several days.
Not all strains behave the same way either. A good example, I've got extensive experience with a handful of strains, but I recently played with WLP028 Edinburgh for the first time. It's pretty similar to the English & not too far from the American strains I have experience with, but it was like getting a stray dog from the pound - I could work with it, but certainly couldn't control it as I'm used to & it just wouldn't behave like the other 'strays' I've picked up in the past.
When you say heavy oil in water, I'm imagining one of those science toys that you can tip back & forth to make waves which seems rather loose. If you're referring more towards a not-quite-runny gravy or wallpaper paste type consistency, you're in the right ballpark. I'd agree the best thing you can do at this point is put it in a starter, observe & take notes. I'd be sure to get really close to a 1.040 starter wort & not pitch it into too large of a volume - maybe about 10x, 50mL slurry to 500mL wort, 100 to 1000, etc. That might even be a touch on the heavy side.
If you do decide to push this further, let us know how it goes.
spiderwrangler wrote:Going for 2013's Dedication to Personal Success, Ozwald?
Linky-thing
Wanna buy an Ozwald's Brewing Co. shirt or pint glass?