15 replies to this topic

[earthtone]

given my lagerfumble, i started wondering....why don't they put more yeast in a vial or smackpack?? why do they put out 25 billion and 100 billion packs that pro brewers have apparently recommended and yet homebrewers know are not enough? would it be that hard to put... 200 billion? 3?

[RommelMagic]

Capitalism?

[earthtone]

touche

[Joe]

It's a good question. I'm guessing there is a fairly linear cost model based on the amount of yeast in a package, otherwise they would include more. If I can offer a larger yeast packet at only a slightly increased cost, then capitalism would dictate that I do so in order to be beat out the competition. (Think the fast food industry.) You could argue that by selling the smaller packets, they can increase their revenue since people would have to pitch multiple packets - but people don't do that - they just buy DME and make a starter.

[denny]

given my lagerfumble, i started wondering....why don't they put more yeast in a vial or smackpack?? why do they put out 25 billion and 100 billion packs that pro brewers have apparently recommended and yet homebrewers know are not enough? would it be that hard to put... 200 billion? 3?

Why would you think that "pro brewers" recommend the size of smack packs? I don't know of any pro brewers who use smack packs. At least not the size smack packs that homebrewers do. Most of the "smack packs" I've seen for pro brewers are a qt. or more. Then they will propagate those. Putting more yeast into a homebrewer size smack pack means more $$. Are you willing to pay more?

[Jimmy James]

When I started brewing in '95 and White Labs was first available locally in San Diego it was before the days of double IPAs, tripels and RIS. Or at least, most of the recipes I saw and brewed back then were more tame by today's standards when it comes to OG and IBU. A vial of WLP001 - their first product - was all I ever needed for a 5.5 gallon batch. That strain attenuates incredibly well, and my brews were all probably right around 1.050. Also, I think a large majority of homebrewers don't frequent this forum and push the limits of brewing like we all tend to do here. Most of the conversations I have with folks I run into at my LHBS indicate that they are brewing moderate OG and IBU beers with extract plus steeping grains. For most of them the single vial or smack pack is going to do the trick. Very few home brewers successfully brew lagers, huge barleywines, and triple IPAs. They probably rarely even attempt something like that and when they do it's probably a kit. Just my thoughts but it's a great question.

[earthtone]

Why would you think that "pro brewers" recommend the size of smack packs? I don't know of any pro brewers who use smack packs. At least not the size smack packs that homebrewers do. Most of the "smack packs" I've seen for pro brewers are a qt. or more. Then they will propagate those. Putting more yeast into a homebrewer size smack pack means more $$. Are you willing to pay more?

from wyeast labs website: "The Activatorâ„¢ package contains a minimum of 100 billion cells in a yeast slurry.. The Activatorâ„¢ is designed to directly inoculate 5 gallons of standard strength ale wort (1.034-1.060 SG) with professional pitching rates."also, if you read the smackpack it says, and I won't quote because it's not in front of me but I read it just a couple days ago: This package is designed to inoculate up to 5 gallons of wort up to 1.060 OG based on the pitching rates recommended by professional brewers.If this isn't a reason to think that "pro brewers" recommend the size of smackpacks then what is? If I didn't come on these forums I wouldn't have known and why question the advice of the company that supplies you with your culture?Jimmy - I get that, it makes sense. The weird thing is that according to the Mr. Malty calc I find even these smaller beers are technically underpitched with only a single vial or smackpack but attenuate just fine when using 001 or 1056, of course problems arise elsewhere but it still seems odd to toe the line on just enough yeast when it can't cost them that much to increase the volume slightly.

[Jimmy James]

according to the Mr. Malty calc I find even these smaller beers are technically underpitched with only a single vial or smackpack but attenuate just fine when using 001 or 1056, of course problems arise elsewhere but it still seems odd to toe the line on just enough yeast when it can't cost them that much to increase the volume slightly.

The first products those companies made were high-attenuators. Lager strains and other funky stuff that can be problematic in getting full attenuation didn't come until later, when the format was already set. White Labs stuff was available in 50mL Corning screw-cap conicals locally in San Diego before the vials, because that 50mL tube is what is cheap and easily available. Most likely these guys wouldn't change formats unless their hand was forced, as those brewers that really need more yeast will simply make a starter or buy multiple tubes/packs. It could be an opening for a 3rd player, but think of the amount of infrastructure, distribution network and in-licensing that would be required to compete - and nothing would stop White/Wyeast from launching a high-gravity wort size to respond...Plus, I think these guys have been in an arms-race to get the most/best strains, get bugs/sour mixes and other stuff we want, so packaging is not the focus of their efforts.

[SchwanzBrewer]

I haven't brewed a beer over 1.055 yet and I use smack packs, but I still make a starter the day before. My first 2 beers I didn't make starters and they were slightly under attenuated. The third I made a starter with the smack pack and it was a home run, fermented perfectly (These were extract beers). Cheers,Rich

[MtnBrewer]

given my lagerfumble, i started wondering....why don't they put more yeast in a vial or smackpack?? why do they put out 25 billion and 100 billion packs that pro brewers have apparently recommended and yet homebrewers know are not enough? would it be that hard to put... 200 billion? 3?

Because it's a lot cheaper to just write "Pitchable Tube" on the label.

[CaptRon]

Because it's a lot cheaper to just write "Pitchable Tube" on the label.

While this is true, wouldn't it kind of be false advertising to make people think that they can simply pitch from the pack/tube and that they are pitching the proper number of cells? Clearly more cells are needed, otherwise we wouldn't need to make starters. Right?

[MtnBrewer]

While this is true, wouldn't it kind of be false advertising to make people think that they can simply pitch from the pack/tube and that they are pitching the proper number of cells? Clearly more cells are needed, otherwise we wouldn't need to make starters. Right?

Yes.

[Thirsty]

We use mr malty all the time for the calculator, but if you read the math https://www.mrmalty.com/pitching.php it shows clearly that the pitchable tubes are only half of what is recommended for a healthy ferment. And that is for a 1.048 wort. If you use the formula as linear, then an imperial beer will usually need twice that, and if it is a lager, twice that.

[CaptRon]

Yes.

It's aight though. Without them we wouldn't have the ability to make these quality beers that we can make at home. So I aint too mad at them.

[MtnBrewer]

It's aight though. Without them we wouldn't have the ability to make these quality beers that we can make at home. So I aint too mad at them.

Valid point. They make a big mess that we have to clean up though.

[CaptRon]

Valid point. They make a big mess that we have to clean up though.

At first I was like but then I was like