After a whirlpool I like to chill and transfer to a carboy. I let this settle for about an hour then rack to a fermentation vessle leaving behind a couple quarts od trub laden (hot break?). can i use this for starter wort?
I can’t answer your question confidently because I’ve never tried it. I imagine that the more trub you have as a percentage of the wort mass, the less fermentable sugar you have and at some point it you may be below the desired OG for the starter.
A side comment - I used to worry about trub management in my beer and did things like you mention where the wort is allowed to sit, or you do a double transfer. After reading some of the experiments on the brulosophy site, I decided not to worry about it. Now I just let some of the trub (maybe 50%) transfer right into the fermenter and it actually seems to help kick off fermentation faster. The beer seems to turn out the same or better from a flavor perspective. It’s one less step and thing to clean and you get a sightly better yield.
Along with the FAN in all the trub is the fats and lipids which will cause oxidation. I’m sure they cover it all in those exbeeriments though. [emoji23]
I wouldn’t probably worry about it in a starter, but I never let hot break and cold break into my fermenting wort. But I step mash, use sauergut and use a low pH so I get all the FAN and zinc I need in the wort. But then again I’m an oddity in this department. [emoji12]
I have always tried to reduce the amount of ANY break going into my fermenters. Mainly for repitching purposes and keeping the wort as clear as possible.
But now after learning of potential issues with residual lipids in trub possibly leading to early oxidation effects I will be more likely than ever to minimize any break getting into the fermenting wort.
Yeah, my experience, too. Gonna minimize it now for even more and better reasons.
unless you have a means to can it and make sure its sterile, I wouldn’t go with this. DME is very cheap.
that being said, despite trub containing everything but actual poison, somehow people make delicious award winning beer without giving too much thought into how much trub they let get into the fermenter.
I have never held back any break from the fermenter. At the end of the boil I chill and then pour everything in the kettle straight into the fermenter.
Not sure about oxidation. I have never noticed it. I do drink my beer pretty fast 4-6 weeks and my 2.5 gallon kegs are empty.
I save yeast slurry for 2-3 batches. The slurry does have plenty of muck in it besides yeast but repitches take off like lighting and the beer tastes fine.
Trub in Kettle …
I drain everything from the kettle into the fermenter with no bad effects. The ity-bity amount of trub in a starter is immaterial.
While I won’t argue as folks can do whatever they please, I want to point out oxidation. I will say this.
“Methods for such optimization are covered in, for example, in the references by Bamforth (1999) and Fix (1998). Following C. D. Dalgliesch (1977), it is useful to characterize staling in terms of three basic stages:
• Stage A is the period of stable, “brewery-fresh” flavor.
• Stage B is a transition period in which a multitude of new flavor sensations can be detected.
• Stage C products are the classic flavor tones involved in beer staling.”
He goes on to list an overview of the stages, the highlights of them being:
“Stage A beer is pristine in flavor. During stage B, Dalgliesch described a decline in hop aroma, a decline in hop bitterness,an increase in “ribes aroma” (or sometimes “catty” flavor), and an increase in sweet, toffee-like, or caramel tones. The terms ribes (or currant) and catty are widely used in the United Kingdom and Scandinavia to recall overripe or spoiled fruit or vegetables. Some tasters cite a “black currant” tone (Hardwick, 1978). In truth, these terms describe a wide spectrum of negative flavors developed when beer is in stage B. Toffee or caramel flavors can come from many sources, but those associated with staling will invariably have unattractive cloying notes. These effects are enhanced by residual diacetyl and also by excess heat treatment of wort. Finally, stage C products range from papery or leathery to sherry- or vinegar-like notes.”
While I agree brewers rarely see the last one, but it’s the first one everyone thinks about when they think oxidation. Fading hop aromas and flavors, beers losing flavor, or adding a caramel like flavor. Those are all oxidation as well. Oxidation can come from many sources, so adding trub can prematurely accelerate it. I am not going to tell you you need to change your practices, just getting the data out there.
There is nothing wrong with a little trub in the starter getting into your fermentor. If you feel the need to remove it go for it. But you are simply not going to be able to taste the difference.
I’m not about to sidetrack this thread into a trub discussion but there is as many studies saying it doesn’t matter as there are that it does. I have the ability to dump it from my conicals so I dump some, but certainly not all.
For a professional brewery it would take DAYS for all the trub to settle out in the conical even with Brew Tan B. So there is no reason to sweat over a small amount.
For a small starter, it’s unlikely to matter, especially if you decant. In full batches, I prefer my beer now that I use a hop stopper that leaves hot break and hop sludge behind. Cold break is hard to tell… I wouldn’t worry about it, though it might make a small difference for very light lagers to some.
But this thread IS about trub. It’s literally in the title. [emoji38] On a serious note I would love to see the studies you reference for it. I am always up for reading some good scientific studies.
I don’t know that brewtan b is going to help break settle any faster( maybe it does?), but there are there many things a professional brewery can do with specialized equipment that we as homebrewers can’t.
Cheers.
The answer to the original question is yes, you CAN use the leftovers for a starter. Is it a best practice? I would say no.
It makes me curious though. Which brew would this starter be for? How long until you’d inoculate that starter, and what would you do with it until then?
What I meant was I didn’t mean for a small conversation on the detrimental effects of trub in a starter being dumped into a 5 gallon batch of beer to explode into a 20 pg rant about trub. 
But if it is going to go there then…
The stuff I read was at least 15 years ago. I’d have to go find it. Look, I have no doubts about your booksmarts, Bryan. You have a far better grasp of the chemistry than I do (want a job? ) All I can say is that for many years I brewed sometimes three or four 12 gallon batches a week in side by side 6.5 gallon carboys. Many, many times I removed trub from one but not the other, and in the end, honestly, I wasn’t sure I could tell a difference. Least it was very hard to blindfolded. Yeah, maybe it did. Then again maybe it didn’t.
I firmly believe that attention to detail is what makes good brewers great brewers and if removing trub from your starters or carboys is the attention to detail that puts you over the top you should go for it! But do yourself a favor and at least try it first, side by side, to see what difference it makes rather than just b relying on something you have read on the internet. (And by YOU I mean the forum at large, not Bryan.)
BTW: You are correct as usual. Commercial brewers do have ways to remove trub. I have a centrifuge for instance, I just haven’t gotten the curiosity to hook it up yet to my kettle/chiller. But it is in the works. But there are some great little breweries making some very good beer all over the world that don’t have that ability.
As I said before I am not out to change what anyone does, for some reason that seems to always be pushed with responses from my posts. I literally stated at least once I am not trying to change anyone’s methods, but just educate them on what trub is, and how it works. If dumping everything in is someones MOP and it works go for it. However it still doesn’t stop what trub contains and what it does, that is documented science. I linked my blog article, which goes into a lot of detail and source work, of what it is and why what I do works for me. I even stated in my first post, I wouldn’t be too concerned about it in a starter. But those kinds of details in my posts seem to be overlooked. I mean isn’t what these posts are about, people asking for opinions on what the have found? It’s fine for other to have an opinion, but when mine challenges the norm, I get raked over the coals? I don’t follow.
On the job comment, If you were serious I am doing brewery consulting work here locally with great success. If you want I can send you references and we can work something out.
No harm or ill will meant in my posts, just science and a little of what I have experienced in my lowly 1000 batch career(which now includes professional batches). It’s all good. 8)
And I am not disagreeing with you either! So let’s not talk over each other about it. I’m only saying that use your self (and others) as a reference point too, before taking something you have read blidly. It may certainly make all the difference in the world. Like I said, I appreciate your grasp of the book knowledge. I need a good chemist at the brewery.
Book knowledge is good, but book knowledge and real knowledge is king. There is not a thing I “preach” that I have not thoroughly tested, I can promise you that, actually I pride myself on that! As I have said before, 2.5yrs ago we would all be raising overflowing mugs in our agreement. But I can’t do that anymore, as everything seems to matter now.
BUT, back to the thread!
I won’t say you haven’t gotten me thinking and rethinking my process Bryan! Good on you.
But, back to the topic, if anyone on this forum can tell the difference between the trub in a starter pitched into a 5 gallon batch, per Bryan’s suggestion that he can based on personal experience and chemistry knowledge, I would be dumbfounded. And I’m not just saying “yep. I can taste it alright”, I’m saying you did blind folded tasting panel and came away with actual evidence to the fact.
That would certainly blow me away and I offer you up the chance to blow my mind by doing the experiment to prove me wrong yourself and publish the findings here. Please!