Dry Yeast Profiles/Descriptions

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

carbon111

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
555
Reaction score
7
Location
Pacific NW
I'm gathering together some info for dry yeasts, noting things like attenuation, floculation, ester/flavor profiles, temp ranges and the like.

There's a little bit of sketchy info about the Danstar and Lallemand yeasts but not much about Muntons or Coopers. I hoping for feedback from people who have used these enough to help nail down some of these characteristics.

The Yeasts in question are:

Safale US-05
Safale S-04
Safbrew S-33
Nottingham
Windsor
Muntons
Coopers

Are these equivalent to any particular liquid yeast strains? I've heard Windsor is the Whitbread strain. True?

I've been using Notty for a long tome and am getting a little bored with it.
 
Each dry yeast is roughly equivalent to a certain liquid strain, but not entirely equivalent.

The overall flavor of each dry yeast is slightly different from the liquid counterpart. For example, safale US-05 is said to have a slight peach flavor that isn't present in the liquid version.

All of the dry packets are different in terms of pitching rates too. It's kind of the luck of the draw. If your packet is fresh and hasn't been mishandled, you'll have an accurate pitching rate. Otherwise you'll be under-pitching (depending on your OG) and get some off-flavors. If you rehydrate and avoid temperature shock, you'll keep these to a minimum.
 
Each dry yeast is roughly equivalent to a certain liquid strain, but not entirely equivalent.

Understood. I'm looking for specifics though.

Knowing 05 is similar to the Chico strain is very useful.

Recently I've been enjoying beers with a maltier profile so I'm especially curious about what people have to say about Windsor, Safale S-04 and Muntons though I'd like to get a better handle on all the yeasts in my original post.
 
Here's what I've got so far in terms of rough equivalency:

Safale US-05 - Wyeast 1056/Chico
Safale S-04 - Wyeast 1099/Whitbread
Safbrew S-33 - ?
Nottingham - Bass?
Windsor - Wyeast 1968/Fullers
Muntons - ?
Coopers - ?

Lots of question marks. ;)
 
Each dry yeast is roughly equivalent to a certain liquid strain, but not entirely equivalent.

The overall flavor of each dry yeast is slightly different from the liquid counterpart. For example, safale US-05 is said to have a slight peach flavor that isn't present in the liquid version.

All of the dry packets are different in terms of pitching rates too. It's kind of the luck of the draw. If your packet is fresh and hasn't been mishandled, you'll have an accurate pitching rate. Otherwise you'll be under-pitching (depending on your OG) and get some off-flavors. If you rehydrate and avoid temperature shock, you'll keep these to a minimum.

?????????????????????????????????????????


I've never heard any of this in all my years of brewing....Peach flavor???

And "All dry packs are different in terms of pitching rates?"

"Luck of the draw"

What??????

I do believe that in the 21st century a company is able to measure out grams of dry ingredients pretty accurately. And millions of dollars both from the hobby and professional brewing industry would be at stake if they couldn't turn out a consistent product.

Yes, many commerial breweries use dry yeast, hence, like fermentis labs, they have industrial divisions.

And also these days most dry yeast is not mis handled, and is fresh, most stops and mail order that I know of are high turnover places, and their yeast doesn't sit on shelf in heated warehouses for months before being shipped out.

This sounds like some of the anti-dry yeast propaganda that evolved from the bad old daysbefore 1978 and legal homebrewing, when the only yeast that was available came from europe in dry cakes that may have sat in the hot cargo hold of a ship for months, then sat under the lid of a can a blue ribbon malt extract for god knows how long.

Danstars website even says this...

The use of active dried professional yeasts for amateur brewing is a relatively new phenomenon introduced by Lallemand. Now, choose your active dried yeast for brewing with confidence. Ask for Danstar superior quality yeasts at your local retailer.

So most of those notions you have really are just biased carryovers from the bad old days.

Nowadays in most homebrew shops, just as much care is put in storing their dry yeasts and they do the liquid and the hops, in cold stoage.

So these days those ideas you may have are definitley not the truth.....Fermentis labs is not some podunk company making half asses yeast with "inconsistant pitching rates," and neither are the makers of the other dry yeast...In this day of consumer choice people wouldn't settle for crappy yeast, and those makers of dry yeast wouldn't still be in business if their products weren't any good.

Pitching a pack of dry yeast is usually over-pitching not under.

Carbon, you can find a lot of info about their yeasts, rather than mis-information and conjecture, (us-05, 04, saflage, safbrew, t-58, etc) here Fermentis : levure, levure pour alcool, levure bière, levure sèche

You can find downloadable pdfs of all the info you need for each yeast.

I've used it to add the info for beersmith (the stuff you are looking for.)

And probably at the other yeastlabs as well....yes dry yeast comes from labs too. Not scraped off the floor someplace.

Muntons | World Class Malt | Home

Danstar Premium Beer Yeasts - The Dry Yeast Advantage

(yes danstar has technical pdfs giving flocculation rate and other info as well.)

These days dry yeast is no better or worse than liguid.

Hopes the links help.

:mug:
 
Appreciate the info, Revvy. I'll dig a bit more.

However, the dry manufacturers are still pretty tightlipped about what strain is which though. You'll never get Lallemand to say "Yes, the S-04 is Whitbread" even though it is sold as such in some stores. ;)

Another tack they take is to be vague enough in their descriptions that it sounds like a yeast is suitable for any style of ale...I guess they don't want to scare off any sales. :)
 
Maybe a bit of a tangent from the OP's question, but.....

Having had some attenuation issues with some of my early brewing efforts, I did hit the danstar and fermentis websites and found them very helpful. Danstar's pdf raised a question for me about Nottingham pitch rates, however, in that their guideline for an appropriate pitch rate is one gram per liter. That would make an 11 gram packet right for a 11 liter (~3 gallon) batch, rather than a 5 gallon batch. I may be totally misunderstanding what they say, though, so here it is for someone more knowledgeable than me to de-code:
4. Usage
• When 100 g active dried yeast is used to inoculate 100 litres of wort, a yeast density of 5–10 million
cells per millilitre is achieved. Brewer may experiment with the pitching rate to achieve a desired beer
style or to suit processing conditions.​

Another interesting tidbit I gleaned from the pdf concerns wort not needing aeration:
• Nottingham British Ale yeast has been conditioned to survive rehydration. The yeast contains an
adequate reservoir of carbohydrates and unsaturated fatty acids to achieve active growth. It is
unnecessary to aerate wort.​

Back to the OP's question:
In my brief brewing experience, I was disappointed in Munton Ale Yeast (the one that is not their "Premium Gold"), and the munton's website info actually does state that their base yeast is not appropriate for all-malt brewer's (which of course I read AFTER using it in a fermentation that stuck around 1.020).
 
In my brief brewing experience, I was disappointed in Munton Ale Yeast (the one that is not their "Premium Gold"), and the munton's website info actually does state that their base yeast is not appropriate for all-malt brewer's (which of course I read AFTER using it in a fermentation that stuck around 1.020).

Good to know. I've got a couple of packs laying around somewhere that I'll try in a braggot or somesuch with loads of sugar.

I'd still like to get a handle on strain equivalency, if any, on the "unknowns":

Safale US-05 - Wyeast 1056/Chico
Safale S-04 - Wyeast 1099/Whitbread
Safbrew S-33 - ?
Nottingham - Bass?
Windsor ~ Wyeast 1968?/Fullers?
Muntons - ?
Coopers - ?
 
i was searching for information on Coopers Sunday and couldn't find any

Here's some of the info from How to brew

Here is an incomplete list of dry yeast strains and their characteristics:

Cooper's Ale (Cooper's)
All-purpose dry ale yeast. It produces a complex woody, fruity beer at warm temperatures. More heat tolerant than other strains, 65-75¡F; recommended for summer brewing. Medium attenuation and flocculation.

Edme Ale (Edme Ltd.)
One of the original dry yeast strains, this produces a soft, bready finish. Medium flocculation and medium-high attenuation. Fermentation range of 62-70°F.

London Ale (Lallemand)
Moderate fruitiness suitable for all pale ale styles. Medium-high attenuation and flocculation. Fermentation range of 64-70°F.

Nottingham Ale (Lallemand)
A more neutral ale yeast with lower levels of esters and a crisp, malty finish. Can be used for lager-type beers at low temperatures. High attenuation and medium-high flocculation. Fermentation range of 57-70°F.

Munton and Fison Ale (Munton and Fison)
An all purpose ale yeast selected for a long shelf life. A vigorous starter, with neutral flavors. Medium attenuation and high flocculation. Fermentation range of 64-70°F.

Windsor Ale (Lallemand)
Produces a full bodied, fruity English ale, but suitable for wheat beers also, including hefe-weizen. Attenuation and flocculation are medium-low. Fermentation range of 64-70°F.

Whitbread Ale (Yeast Lab)
An excellent pale ale yeast with a smooth crisp flavor and fruity aroma. Medium attenuation and high flocculation. Fermentation range of 65-70¡F.

Safale S-04 (DCL Yeast)
A well-known commercial English ale yeast selected for its vigorous character and high flocculation. This yeast is recommended for a large range of ale styles and is especially well adapted to cask-conditioned ales.
Recommended temperature range of 64-75°F.

Saflager S-23 (DCL Yeast)
This lager strain is used by several European commercial breweries. This yeast develops soft estery notes at the recommended temperature range of 48-59°F and more ale-like characteristics at warmer temperatures. From what I have read, I am speculating that this is a Kolsch or Alt-type yeast. This strain of yeast will produce a lager character at 54°F, and homebrewers have reported good results with this yeast. Given the recommended fermentation temperature range, these yeasts may not respond well to lagering (extended secondary fermentation at low temperatures) as described in Chapter 10, and probably should be maintained at 54°F for the duration of the time in the fermenter, approximately 2-3 weeks. I have not used this yeast myself and cannot say for certain.
 
in fact any of the dry yeast haters should go back and read just what Palmer says about dry yeast.

6.3 Yeast Forms

Yeast come in two main product forms, dry and liquid. (There is also another form, available as pure cultures on petri dishes or slants, but it is generally used as one would use liquid yeast.) Dry yeast are select, hardy strains that have been dehydrated for storability. There are a lot of yeast cells in a typical 7 gram packet. For best results, it needs to be re-hydrated before it is pitched. For the first-time brewer, a dry ale yeast is highly recommended.

Dry yeast is convenient for the beginning brewer because the packets provide a lot of viable yeast cells, they can be stored for extended periods of time and they can be prepared quickly on brewing day. It is common to use one or two packets (7 - 14 grams) of dried yeast for a typical five gallon batch. This amount of yeast, when properly re-hydrated, provides enough active yeast cells to ensure a strong fermentation. Dry yeast can be stored for extended periods (preferably in the refrigerator) but the packets do degrade with time. This is one of the pitfalls with brewing from the no-name yeast packets taped to the top of a can of malt extract. They are probably more than a year old and may not be very viable. It is better to buy another packet or three of a reputable brewer's yeast that has been kept in the refrigerator at the brewshop. Some leading and reliable brands of dry yeast are DCL Yeast, Yeast Labs (marketed by G.W. Kent, produced by Lallemand of Canada), Cooper's, DanStar (produced by Lallemand), Munton & Fison and Edme.

Dry yeasts are good but the rigor of the dehydration process limits the number of different ale strains that are available and in the case of dry lager yeast, eliminates them almost entirely. A few dry lager yeasts do exist, but popular opinion is that they behave more like ale yeasts than lager. DCL Yeast markets two strains of dry lager yeast, Saflager S-189 and S-23, though only S-23 is currently available in a homebrewing size. The recommended fermentation temperature is 48-59°F. I would advise you to use two packets per 5 gallon batch to be assured of a good pitching rate.

The only thing missing with dry yeast is real individuality, which is where liquid yeasts come in. Many more different strains of yeast are available in liquid form than in dry.

The only real "criticism" of dry yeast, is that, due to how they are made to be stable, that there are not many varieties available, that and the warning to avoid those "no-name" yeasts under the lids of extract can and to go with one of the "proven" strains.

No yeast bashing by him at all.
 
Despite the manufacturer claiming that S-33 is Belgian in origin, those of us who've used it get more British flavors from it. I've heard that it's from Edme.

You don't have Fermentis T-58 on your list, do you? I have no idea where it's from, but it's got Belgian character and is heavier on phenolics than esters. Makes a pretty good wit.
 
Cool, I'll add T-58 and some of the others people have mentioned to my growing list.

And Revvy, thanks for the cut-and-paste from Palmers HTB...I still need that book in my beer library. I keep forgetting that there's way more than just introductory stuff in there. I haven't seen the Edme Ale or London Ale yeasts he mentions around before.

BTW, I love dry yeast and would agree it's just as good as liquid - I've gotten great results with dry for over three years.

I've used mainly Nottingham or Wyeast once in a while (for hitting a specific style) and I just want to colate my options as I'm kind of tired of Notty..had some bad luck with my last few batches.

Safale S-05 looks like a good replacement for Nottingham, I used it some time ago and remembered it being a similar profile, if maybe a tad drier. I can't find any info on Safale US-05's alcohol tolerance on the Fermentis website or the PDF spec sheet...anybody have a clue?

Also, if Windsor is a good substitute for Wyeast 1968, that would be good news for my wallet. I love 1968 for English Bitters but would love to not have to make a starter or spend as much.
 
Despite the manufacturer claiming that S-33 is Belgian in origin, those of us who've used it get more British flavors from it. I've heard that it's from Edme.

You don't have Fermentis T-58 on your list, do you? I have no idea where it's from, but it's got Belgian character and is heavier on phenolics than esters. Makes a pretty good wit.

I keep hearing about t-58 yeast but I've never tried it. I have been interested in playing with it.
 
Also, if Windsor is a good substitute for Wyeast 1968, that would be good news for my wallet. I love 1968 for English Bitters but would love to not have to make a starter or spend as much.

I just used the S-04 on an ordinary bitter for the first time. It's still young, but it's promising... Might think of giving that one a try.
 
I just used the S-04 on an ordinary bitter for the first time. It's still young, but it's promising... Might think of giving that one a try.

Based on its lineage, I think S-04 would be good for British-style Stouts and Porter's as well. I finally nailed down that S-04 really is the Whitbread strain. :)

...until I have more experience with S-04, for a stronger malt profile Bitter I'd still lean towards Wyeast 1968 (which I've used with good results) or Danstar Windsor (which I'll try on my next Bitter to see how close it is to 1968).
 
for a stronger malt profile Bitter I'd still lean towards Wyeast 1968 (which I've used with good results) or Danstar Windsor (which I'll try on my next Bitter to see how close it is to 1968).

Windsor is a very different strain to 1968... at least in it's flocculation. It's also considered a pretty fruity strain. I brewed my bitter recipe with it (normally use WLP 023 Burton Ale). It has a similar level of fruitiness to the Burton Ale, but a different ester profile... a less refined ester profile.

The attenuation was considerably lower (68% compared to 73% with the Burton Ale)... and I adjusted the recipe to account for low attenuation. I lowered the mash temp to 149°F, increased the sugar addition (Lyle's Golden Syrup), and cut out the Cara-Pils. I can't imagine how poor the attenuation would have been if I didn't do all of that.

All in all, I like the flavor of the Windsor yeast, but I don't think I'll be using it that often. A big turn-off for me was the low flocculation. I had to use gelatin to clear it... and I'd rather not have to mess around with yeast finings.
 
Windsor is Fullers!? Why didn't anyone say that before? I love fuller's beers. If I can brew anything like them, I won't ever need to go to the liquor store again. I've been toying with the idea of getting Wyeast 1968, but am still a bit new to brewing to go to liquid yeasts. It's great if I could use a dry yeast instead.

Windsor is a very different strain to 1968... at least in it's flocculation.

Oh, okay. Well, I might give it a go anyway.
 
I'm brewing a Bitter tonight with Windsor to see if the flavor profile and behavior are anything like Wyeast 1968.
It's a shame that it's not a direct equivalent but seemingly none of these dry yeasts really are. Thanks for the solid info Menschmaschine!

The information about Windsor's flocculation is worrisome but I'm willing to give it a try as a friend brewed with it and his beer cleared reasonably well...he did use Irish Moss in the boil though.

I think I'm going to put all the info I'm gathering into a spreadsheet.
 
The information about Windsor's flocculation is worrisome but I'm willing to give it a try as a friend brewed with it and his beer cleared reasonably well...he did use Irish Moss in the boil though.

Using kettle finings won't affect yeast flocculation/settling (that I know of). Did he cold-crash it? I'm wondering if cold crashing for a few days would produce a somewhat clear beer with Windsor. I heard about it's poor flocculation, so I didn't even take the chance. It was cloudy as hell with yeast at the 3 week primary mark, so I cold-crashed it AND added gelatin. So, I don't know what the beer would be like if I just cold-crashed. It's very clear now though.
 
:D

Regarding our discussion of Danstar's Windsor:

I have in front of me a beer my aforementioned friend brewed with Windsor. It's as clear and transparent as you would want and hope a homebrew to be - not cloudy, opaque or even translucent, but a beautiful transparent amber. (EDIT: As drink this, I notice there is just the slightest haze actually...but not bad at all. Better than most of my brews anyway ;))

Robin says that according to his notes:
The OG was 1.052 on 6/6/09 - 5.5 gallons pitched with 11 grams Windsor
The SG was 1.020 on 6/20/09 - racked to secondary for dry hopping
The FG was 1.010 on 7/7/09

This was not cold crashed nor were any finings used at all. The only thing used to help clear was a whirlfloc tablet during the boil. My guess is that his racking to secondary may have helped clear this quite a bit.

His only complaint was that Windsor was a very slow worker.

I'm doing a Bittter in the next couple of days and will follow its behavior very closely.
 
By the way, Carbon111, this is a great project and an invaluable resource for those of us that do not use liquid yeasts. Thanks for your hard work.

I'll be interested to know what information the side by side comparison of 1968 and windsor yields. I've been thinking of doing my own comparison. That's a way in the future as I'd have to get small fermenters to split a batch. If it goes ahead I'll be sure to post here and contribute to the body of knowledge.
 
Unfortunately windsor is not the dry equivalant of fullers in fact they differ quite a lot, windsor is more fruity and is rubbish at flocculating, fullers yeast is an incredible flocculater and produces quite a lot of diacety which is a must for producing the malt/toffee profile of fullers beers.

I know diacetyl seems to be a dirty word around here (palmers influence i think) but in some english ales its highly desirable.
 
Unfortunately windsor is not the dry equivalant of fullers in fact they differ quite a lot, windsor is more fruity and is rubbish at flocculating, fullers yeast is an incredible flocculater and produces quite a lot of diacety which is a must for producing the malt/toffee profile of fullers beers.

I know diacetyl seems to be a dirty word around here (palmers influence i think) but in some english ales its highly desirable.

Your points are very well-taken. The flocculation issue was brought up before and, despite Windsor's shortcomings, I know for a fact you can make a very clear beer with Windsor.

I agree that there is not a one-to-one corespondance between Windsor and Fullers but I find there are some similarities. I want to explore this more deeply but I'm certainly willing to be completely wrong. There's just not a lot of dry choices... ;)

I think I'll split my next Bitter into two 3-gallon fermenters and pitch both yeasts just to see if there really is any correlation. If there's none at all, so be it...I'm just trying to learn :D

Regardless, I'll post my dry yeast spreadsheet once I fill in a few more bits of information, or maybe I'll just package it as a single-page, printable PDF. There's just not a lot of dry choices and I just want a simple reference chart I can use and share with others...if they find it useful.
 
I'm thinking of putting all this info I'm finding into a single chart with info something like this with all the commercially available yeasts on one handy page:

dry_yeast.jpg
 
I'm thinking of putting all this info I'm finding into a single chart with info something like this with all the commercially available yeasts on one handy page:

That would be great and very useful... can't wait to see it finished.
 
Thanks. :D

I know I'm not "re-inventing the wheel", but It would be nice to have a single simple reference chart. ;)

I'll finish it this this weekend sometime and post it here for criticism/corrections/suggestions.
 
That's cool...I remember that with beersmith Us-05 and Pacman (liguid) weren't included so I had to add them, and I had to do web digging and ask people for info just like you, your chart would have come in quite handy.
 
Safale S-04 gave me a huge stone fruit flavor in a Bitter last year. I used a large % of torrified wheat and EKG. Everyone who tasted it said how much they liked my Peach beer! That would be a great complement IF there was actually fruit in it. I have read others experienced the same flavors.

As for the T-58, I use it to bottle condition all my Belgian beers. Great flocculation, high alcohol tolerance and broad temperature range make this a perfect fit for big Quads and Triples. http://www.fermentis.com/FO/pdf/HB/EN/Safbrew_T-58_HB.pdf
 
I've been dealing with a bad food-based allergic reaction so it will be a few days before I can finish the spreadsheet and PDF.

Thanks to those who sent me the info via PM! :mug:
 
I'm pretty sure fermentis has came out and said US-05 is chico ale yeast, not like it, but is it. So US-05=1056=001.

Notty isn't quite as clean as 05 is. Can you sub it... sure but it's not quite the same.
 
Back
Top