Tom Roeder's Dry Yeast vs Liquid Yeast Experiment

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.
Interesting. I got VERY worried in the first video when I heard the audience applause track added, and then Tom even mentioned TakeSomeAdvice as his "Canadian friend"... NOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Thankfully Tom's video from that point on was a much more intelligent process than anything TakeSome(Sh*tty)Advice has ever attempted or even wet-dreamed about.

Subscribed. :)
 
Can anyone point me to the recipe Tom used? I skimmed this thread and have watched the videos... is keeping it secret till the reveal part of the experiment?
 
Looking forward to seeing the results. I certainly respect the time and effort of all involved in this project. Can't see why anyone would have a negative comment to make, if you don't like it tune out. I would have liked to try the beers... I'm thinking I have to do my own version of this and post it up here for some ridicule.;)
 
The "better" tasting beer was the dry yeast in all 4 tests.
















Just my opinion :)
 
jmf143 said:
The "better" tasting beer was the dry yeast in all 4 tests.


Just my opinion :)
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinking.. but only because he says "Alot of you may be surprised to hear this but...." - before he cuts the video out.
He probably did that on purpose to throw us off though.
 
bruin_ale said:
That's what I'm thinking.. but only because he says "Alot of you may be surprised to hear this but...." - before he cuts the video out.
He probably did that on purpose to throw us off though.
Click to expand...

It also goes along with some of the tasters notes as well though. They all seem to comment that one retained more hop flavor/aroma and the US-05 fermented less aggressively and didn't have any blowoff so it would make sense that it should be the one that retained more volatile hop essence.

Only time will tell, but if this is the case the experiment might be more of a measure of rapid vs more controlled fermentation and maybe the conclusion will be if you are brewing a pale ale and get significant blow off that is all the more reason to dry hop.
 
brewit2it said:
It also goes along with some of the tasters notes as well though. They all seem to comment that one retained more hop flavor/aroma and the US-05 fermented less aggressively and didn't have any blowoff so it would make sense that it should be the one that retained more volatile hop essence.

Only time will tell, but if this is the case the experiment might be more of a measure of rapid vs more controlled fermentation and maybe the conclusion will be if you are brewing a pale ale and get significant blow off that is all the more reason to dry hop.
Click to expand...

Yes, I remember thinking the same as I was watching the video. I don't want to open this can of worms again, but it would be interesting to see the same experiment run a couple more times - I doubt very much that 1056 would always be more violent than S05.

There was a post near the very beginning of this thread asking why you would think S05 and 1056 are the same. I have thought that they were at least similar or derived from the same strain for a long time. The reason is that S05 used to be called US56 about 4 years ago. They probably were forced to change the name by Wyeast, but at the time the understanding was that they were the same.
 
brewit2it said:
It also goes along with some of the tasters notes as well though. They all seem to comment that one retained more hop flavor/aroma and the US-05 fermented less aggressively and didn't have any blowoff so it would make sense that it should be the one that retained more volatile hop essence.

Only time will tell, but if this is the case the experiment might be more of a measure of rapid vs more controlled fermentation and maybe the conclusion will be if you are brewing a pale ale and get significant blow off that is all the more reason to dry hop.
Click to expand...

I have a different theory - I think the dry yeast did a NINJA ferment overnight. In the video, when he notes that the liquid yeast is going stronger and the dry hasn't quite taken off yet, it looks to me like there's already a krausen ring in that carboy, where the ferment is actually settling down, not still trying to take off. It also clears faster than the liquid ferment. Thus, my theory is that the dry sample will in fact have less flavor because it was actually the most vigorous ferment and drove off all the volatiles. Chewed through that sheeat like Charlie Sheen on a passed out hooker. :rockin:

Or not. :drunk:
 
Having not seen the video, can someone tell me how he controlled the pitching rates to make sure he got the same number of cells in each batch?
 
I took a look at the posting dates of the videos, they were back in late April. All 3 of the first tastings were posted within 4 days of each other. It's been two weeks since the rest of the video's were posted, doesn't this kind of void the final guys review? The experiment is only viable if they tasted them at the same time. Who is to say the beer didn't condition a bit more with the extra time?

Of course this assumes that he hasn't tasted it yet, maybe he is just futzing with the video before he uploads it?
 
bruin_ale said:
Yes, I remember thinking the same as I was watching the video. I don't want to open this can of worms again, but it would be interesting to see the same experiment run a couple more times - I doubt very much that 1056 would always be more violent than S05.

There was a post near the very beginning of this thread asking why you would think S05 and 1056 are the same. I have thought that they were at least similar or derived from the same strain for a long time. The reason is that S05 used to be called US56 about 4 years ago. They probably were forced to change the name by Wyeast, but at the time the understanding was that they were the same.
Click to expand...

They are the same strain, at least they were at one time multiple generations ago. They came from the "chico" strain in California. I think Anchor brewing was the original source but I'm relying on memory here so I could be wrong. YLP 001 is also a "chico" strain. I don't know how much they have mutated since the various yeast companies started their cultures.

I've always considered them equivalent but I've never compared them face-to-face.
 
Ravenshead said:
They are the same strain, at least they were at one time multiple generations ago. They came from the "chico" strain in California. I think Anchor brewing was the original source but I'm relying on memory here so I could be wrong. YLP 001 is also a "chico" strain. I don't know how much they have mutated since the various yeast companies started their cultures.

I've always considered them equivalent but I've never compared them face-to-face.
Click to expand...

Anchor is WLP050 or WY1272. WLP001 and WY1056 are from Sierra Nevada who got it from Siebel who got it from Ballantine.
 
TheMan said:
I took a look at the posting dates of the videos, they were back in late April. All 3 of the first tastings were posted within 4 days of each other. It's been two weeks since the rest of the video's were posted, doesn't this kind of void the final guys review? The experiment is only viable if they tasted them at the same time. Who is to say the beer didn't condition a bit more with the extra time?

Of course this assumes that he hasn't tasted it yet, maybe he is just futzing with the video before he uploads it?
Click to expand...

It's possible that they changed a small amount while in the bottle but they were bottled off carbonated, cleared kegs and not bottle conditioned. If an extra 2 weeks in a bottle changes the beer that much, yeast selection is the least of our worries.
 
doctorRobert said:
Whoa, the chico strain comes from a brewery in chico. Who knew!
Click to expand...

Or a yeast lab in Chicago, or a brewery on the East Coast, or a brewery in Santa Rosa, or a brewery in Denver. It comes from a lot of places. Sierra Nevada isn't the source, we know that much, they are open about where they got it from and where they think that place got it from.
 
rockfish42 said:
Ah, I finally remembered where I saw something helpful before. Zymurgy did a test back in 2005 and found the differences pretty minimal with a split batch of cream ale.
http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/attachments/0000/1228/JAzym06_YeastDebate.pdf
Click to expand...

I like the pale ale experiment over a cream ale, just because in a pale there are more flavors to shine through, such as hops and a but of malt.

Looking forward to Sunday! Honestly though, after Bobby's review, I don't really know how I would take the results :) I was dead set on A after the 1st two reviews, but now I'm just anxious to hear the final review. Thanks for shaking things up a little bit there Bobby :)
 
Bobby_M said:
It's possible that they changed a small amount while in the bottle but they were bottled off carbonated, cleared kegs and not bottle conditioned. If an extra 2 weeks in a bottle changes the beer that much, yeast selection is the least of our worries.
Click to expand...

Ah, sounds good then. I didn't know they were keg carbed (only watched the review videos).
 
chapa said:
I like the pale ale experiment over a cream ale, just because in a pale there are more flavors to shine through, such as hops and a but of malt.
Click to expand...

True, but it's kind of a two way street. If you're trying to see that both yeasts are "clean" fermenting - a cream ale is so light in flavor that any different flavors produced by the yeast will be much more noticeable.
 
bruin_ale said:
True, but it's kind of a two way street. If you're trying to see that both yeasts are "clean" fermenting - a cream ale is so light in flavor that any different flavors produced by the yeast will be much more noticeable.
Click to expand...

Very true. I mean you definitely wouldn't want to do it with an IPA, but a nice pale with a slight but noticeable hop and malt character would let you see how it compliments an american style brew. I agree though, just depends what you're are looking for.
 
Hey everyone, I had no idea that there was this much buzz on here about my videos! I knew that dantheman13 had linked my videos on here, but I had no idea that they had caused such a stir, I finally just checked this thread for the first time this morning! Thanks to dantheman13 for the links.

The third guy that I sent the beers to is supposed to shoot his video this weekend, and I promise as soon as he gets his video up, I will post one shortly there after. I am a little disappointed as to how long Nige4958 has waited to shoot his video, but knowing Nige, it will be well worth the wait.

For the few guys who don't think I was definitive enough, or thorough enough in my experiment: I never made the claim that I was going to put the "liquid vs dry" debate to rest, and that this would be the end all be all of the yeast debates. I happened to have a pack of 1056, which I usually don't use. My LHBS made a mistake on one of my orders, so I had to go back a second time to get my stuff, so they threw in a fresh pack of 1056 for my troubles. I kept it in my frig for a few weeks until I decided to do this experiment. It was meant as just a fun thing to do, not to be taken too seriously, after all, this is a hobby. Youtube is where I learned a lot of my brewing from, and from this place as well, so I feel the need to contribute in a positive manner, which I believe that I have done, to the Youtube community that has been so very good to me.

For those who don't want to watch tasting videos: don't. Easy.

Stay tuned!!!
 
tomroeder said:
HI never made the claim that I was going to put the "liquid vs dry" debate to rest, and that this would be the end all be all of the yeast debates.
Click to expand...

Other people made that claim for you. They were being refuted, not you. Don't take it personally.
 
Hey Tom thanks a lot for doing this. Can't wait to see which yeast enhanced the hop profile. Mmm hops...
 
tomroeder said:
Hey everyone, I had no idea that there was this much buzz on here about my videos! I knew that dantheman13 had linked my videos on here, but I had no idea that they had caused such a stir, I finally just checked this thread for the first time this morning! Thanks to dantheman13 for the links.
Click to expand...

Glad you finally showed up, Tom! Your work has been quite entertaining, and so has this thread (which has grown a third leg). Thanks for sharing it with us on YouTube!
 
really the biggest problem I had with this experiment was that I didnt get the beers too
 
I noticed at 12:40 in the main video Tom used the same funnel to pitch the 1056 liquid yeast that he used seconds earlier for the US-05 dry yeast batch.

Is it possible that the Wyeast 1056 batch picked up some lingering US-05 yeast from the funnel and is really a mixed US-05 + 1056 hybrid because of this?

Regardless, it's still a cool experiment and I'm looking forward to the results.
 

Similar threads

J
Non-alcoholic homebrew - buzzed feeling?
Replies
7
Views
755
mashdar
mashdar
mac_1103
Best dry yeast for an Old Speckled Hen clone?
Replies
6
Views
881
mac_1103
mac_1103
orgenomescii
Brewing like a Barbarian: Ancient Irish Descriptions of Malting & Brewing
Replies
2
Views
1K
McMullan
McMullan
mongoose33
Oxygenating Dry Yeast issue
Replies
9
Views
1K
Red over White
Red over White
N
Differences between samples after forced diacetyl test OTHER than diacetyl
Replies
5
Views
1K
Noob_Brewer
N
InkBird 300

Latest posts

Back
Top