Anyone else really dislike the flavor of wlp833?

[Jcruse]

I brewed an Oktoberfest as one of my first 5 gallon batches a few months back (actually brewed it in March/Marzen), but kicked the keg far before October. In that batch I used w-34/70, and it came out delicious and really malty. I submitted it to a competition and it scored around a 33, with the main critique being that it lacked body, and lacked a little character. But the bear tasted very clean and crisp.

In my re-brew of the same recipe, I swapped in wlp833 instead of w-34/70, and bumped the mash temp from 152 to 154 trying to get a little more body and character in the beer. I also followed the "quick lager" method from brulosophy. I made a 2 liter starter with a stirplate per instructions from Mr malty, and let it ferment at 52 for about a week, before bumping up to 65 for a diacetyl rest (airlock activity had stopped and krausen had fallen, and gravity was ~75% complete @ 1.020). Unforutnately the fermentation remained stuck at 75% even after rousing the yeast a few times.

After kegging the beer, and letting it condition for a couple weeks at ~38 degrees on CO2, I gave it a taste, and it was a fruity ester bomb, nothing like the clean malty beer I got with w-34/70. It also doesn't help that it's too sweet from the stuck fermentation wlp833 gave me. I've given it little tastes over the past week or so, and it may have improved slightly, but definitely not a beer I'm looking forward to drinking.

The quick-lager method says that the beer should be ready to drink by now, but does wlp833 need extended lagering time? Was my fermentation temp of 52 too high for this yeast? I remember my batch with w-34/70 tasted so good at kegging time (prior to lagering), that I drank 2 flat pints that were left over after kegging, and lagering didn't do much to change the flavor.

I had only read positives about wlp833 and that it was the perfect lager/Oktoberfest yeast, etc... Anyone else have unfavorable opinions of this yeast? I actually harvested the yeast for a Doppelbock that I was going to brew, but wondering if I should just toss it, and go back to w-34/70 for that one.

 

[beersk]

No, you're crazy! 833 is some good yeast. Sounds like you might've under aerated or under pitched or both. The esters aren't necessarily a yeast character thing, it's a yeast treatment/health issue. While I certainly agree that 34/70 is a great yeast, 833 is also fantastic. Right now, I've got a helles fermenting with 838 that I'm very excited for. A friend of mine has a helles with 838 on tap that is fantastic. Any commercial helles you see or try from the US is nothing compared to these helles beers we brew. I don't know what commercial breweries are doing, but it ain't right.
So you might as well just rebrew this beer if you've got time! I don't know that you should toss this current one.

 

[TheBigLebrewsk1]

I like 833, it defines the Cali common style. My anchor clones can't go without it.

 

[schematix]

What temp did you pitch at? Just 1 tube into 2L on a stir plate?

I personally find the differences between lager yeasts to be so subtle that it's more about process than the yeast. There are differences, but if you made a fruity lager its in your process, not the yeast.

FWIW, my first few lagers were buttery and estery. Doubled my pitching rates and started pitching around 40-45F and now if anything they don't have enough character.

 

[Jcruse]

No, you're crazy! 833 is some good yeast. Sounds like you might've under aerated or under pitched or both. The esters aren't necessarily a yeast character thing, it's a yeast treatment/health issue. While I certainly agree that 34/70 is a great yeast, 833 is also fantastic. Right now, I've got a helles fermenting with 838 that I'm very excited for. A friend of mine has a helles with 838 on tap that is fantastic. Any commercial helles you see or try from the US is nothing compared to these helles beers we brew. I don't know what commercial breweries are doing, but it ain't right.
So you might as well just rebrew this beer if you've got time! I don't know that you should toss this current one.

What temp did you pitch at? Just 1 tube into 2L on a stir plate?

I personally find the differences between lager yeasts to be so subtle that it's more about process than the yeast. There are differences, but if you made a fruity lager its in your process, not the yeast.

FWIW, my first few lagers were buttery and estery. Doubled my pitching rates and started pitching around 40-45F and now if anything they don't have enough character.

I aerated with pure O2 and a aeration stone for ~2 min, and pitched at 52. My starter was 2L with 2 vials of yeast (all per Mr Malty). The starter was cold crashed and decanted to avoid off-flavors. I then let the yeast warm to pitching temps slowly. I don't think there was anything wrong with my process...

This post on another site references wlp833's tendency to be "fruity"
https://beaconhillsbrewhouse.wordpr...ssion-and-common-questions-on-brewing-lagers/

 

[douglasbarbin]

I like 833, it defines the Cali common style. My anchor clones can't go without it.

833 is the German Bock yeast. You are thinking of 810.

As far as the OP, I disagree. I just split a batch of Oktoberfest, using 833 for 5 gallons and 838 for the other 5 gallons. The batch fermented with 833 finished several points lower and tasted drier than the one fermented with 838.

 

[g-star]

I aerated with pure O2 and a aeration stone for ~2 min, and pitched at 52. My starter was 2L with 2 vials of yeast (all per Mr Malty). The starter was cold crashed and decanted to avoid off-flavors. I then let the yeast warm to pitching temps slowly. I don't think there was anything wrong with my process...

This post on another site references wlp833's tendency to be "fruity"
https://beaconhillsbrewhouse.wordpr...ssion-and-common-questions-on-brewing-lagers/

I use 833 all the time, and it is not fruity if your technique is sound.

I typically use 2 very fresh vials in 4-5L stir plate starter. Decant and pitch into well-oxygenated wort that is about 44F. Bring the temp up slowly to about 48-50F and hold there until you reach about 60% attenuation, then ramp up to the low 60's to finish up.

 

[mkeckjr]

Another +1 to 833. This is generally my go-to yeast for malty lagers, and I actually find it one of the cleanest of the commercially available lager yeasts, even more so that W-34/70.

I personally would suggest pitching the WLP833 into the doppelbock you're planning on doing. It really is an excellent yeast for a malty style like that. Also, as you've said, wait on your Oktoberfest a bit. How clear is it? Perhaps a little conditioning would hurt. Best of luck.

 

[jekeane]

I have not had good results with the quick lagering method mentioned above. I have only tried the quick method with 833. I have brewed the same beer with 833 using a traditional lagering schedule and the quick schedule. The traditional schedule has scored consistently better by a range of 4-8 points. I have had a high of 42 with traditional methods and the highest I have received with quick is 36.5. I know judges vary from competition so the scoring change can be explained away but I feel the same way about the beers as well.

 

[douglasbarbin]

I have not had good results with the quick lagering method mentioned above. I have only tried the quick method with 833. I have brewed the same beer with 833 using a traditional lagering schedule and the quick schedule. The traditional schedule has scored consistently better by a range of 4-8 points. I have had a high of 42 with traditional methods and the highest I have received with quick is 36.5. I know judges vary from competition so the scoring change can be explained away but I feel the same way about the beers as well.

I recently re-evaluated my two lagers (one fermented with 833, the other with 838, otherwise identical) and the beer fermented with 838 was actually noticeably cleaner. The one fermented with 833 had a bit of fruitiness to it. These were both done using the quick lager method (Brulosopher). It seems to me that this method works better with 838 than with 833, based on this lone experiment.

 

[Jcruse]

I recently re-evaluated my two lagers (one fermented with 833, the other with 838, otherwise identical) and the beer fermented with 838 was actually noticeably cleaner. The one fermented with 833 had a bit of fruitiness to it. These were both done using the quick lager method (Brulosopher). It seems to me that this method works better with 838 than with 833, based on this lone experiment.

Ah! Thanks for confirming what I was experiencing. I knew I threw too many changed variables into this batch (different yeast, different fermentation schedule, etc.). But it's good to know that 833 produces good results with a traditional lager fermentation schedule.

Now my question is, my harvested 833 has been sitting in the fridge for a couple weeks, and it will be at least another week or two before I can brew the Doppelbock. Should I wake it up with a starter, or just let it rise to pitching temps and toss it in(it was harvested as an unwashed slurry into 2x16 oz Mason jars)?

 

[beersk]

I usually don't worry about making a start until the yeast is at least a month or more old. So you'll probably be fine there.

You don't need to let it warm up to pitching temp either. Just dump it in cold. For a doppelbock, I'd toss both jars.