Dry yeasts identified - your opinions please!

[tizoc]

@Protos do you have a link to that thread? I am interested. (Edit: found it)

Somebody once told me something similar, that after the first generation it started to behave better. But also that when he tried to use a starter, it didn't work, so one had to "sacrifice" a batch to get the "good S-04". What is your starter procedure? do you let it ferment to completion and then cold crash it? or do you pitch it at high krausen? or something else? maybe the method has something to do with it.

(Edit: I see that someone else on that thread made the same comment about the starters not being enough for him, I'm curious about how do you do your starters, it seems to make a difference)

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I hate S04 tartness (or rather to say, sourness) too.

Yeah, I used S-04 for years. Then a buddy at my homebrew club pointed out the slight twang that he got from S-04. After that I always tasted that twang. I moved over to WLP013 as my yeast for my English style beers (mostly Milds and Porters). While I am okay with harvesting and repitching WLP013, I am wanting to move to dry yeasts more to avoid the hassle of making starters and keeping jars of yeast around.

Has anybody done or read about a side by side of a fresh dry pack vs harvested yeast of that strain? I have seen some hints that the drying process impacts the yeast enough that they perform differently on that first pitch, but I have not seen anything conclusive. I have harvested and repitched US-05 and S-04, but never did a direct side by side.

I want to get around to a side by side with WLP013 vs Verdant. I like the idea of stocking packs of Verdant for hazies and English beers.

 

[Protos]

Well, I haven't done a side by side comparison, but in practical terms I can say my previous dry-sprinkled-S04 batches tasted very sour to me (I don't like acidity in any products, perhaps a sort of individual sensibility) - and now I drink my starter-primed-S04 beers with no regrets and no sour reflections whether I should have better flushed it down the gurgler... The beer is slightly tart, of course, but nothing more than the style demands. After propagation, the yeast behaves more like M36, which i like.

Most usually I make smaller batches, 1.5 G (6L) each, so I make propotionately bigger starters: like 1/10th of the whole batch volume. It would be like 2L in a standard 5G batch, I think. I ferment to completion then cold crash my starters. And I pitch it after it has flocculated, never at high Kraeusen. I tried two- and three-stepped starters, but then the acid-lowering effect wasn't as noticeable, it kinda stabilizes after the first step. I noticed a similar effect on K97 and US05, both of which I use extensively. Even BE-134 looses quite a bit of its initial tartness when reused (which is not a good thing, however, as it's a well-balanced yeast and doesn't have any excessive twang in the first place), and to T58 propagation is outwardly detrimental as it robs it of a lot of its zest.

That's my humble experience with propagating Fermentis dry yeasts )

 

[Kold Brygg]

Some interesting information about the origin of Nottingham, Windsor and London. They come from the same source.

Thanks for the feedback and yes Nottingham is a good option for lower temperature fermentations and lager style beers. The only thing to bear in mind is pitching rate, always should increase cell concentration when doing lower temp fermentations and adjusting for that more stressful environment.

I think and assume it just must be the genetic composition of the strain makes it very tolerant to temperature, some strains have very good temperature tolerance and others do not and it related to genetics. There is not a lot to share or reveal about the origins of the strain, which has been in the Lallemand culture collection for about 30 years. My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits. The culture had 4 strains in it and these were isolated in to single strain yeasts. One of these became Nottingham and two of the other strains were Windsor and London (which we also still produce commercially). There was no information about origin or brewery that the multi-strain culture came from. There are always lots of rumours and guesses about where strains come from but most of the time it is not that exciting, it is simply taken from a culture collection with little to no information about the ‘origin’.

Kind regards,

Robert Percival
Regional Sales Manager - Europe
Lallemand Brewing – #WeBrewWithYou

 

[Hanglow]

Interesting that three of their current yeasts came from the same sample from Boots.

 

[kmarkstevens]

In case anyone did figure out the link had the english reply from the Lallemond Regional Sales Manager - Europe on Nottingham origins:

There is not a lot to share or reveal about the origins of the strain, which has been in the Lallemand culture collection for about 30 years. My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits. The culture had 4 strains in it and these were isolated in to single strain yeasts. One of these became Nottingham and two of the other strains were Windsor and London (which we also still produce commercially). There was no information about origin or brewery that the multi-strain culture came from.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Well, I haven't done a side by side comparison, but in practical terms I can say my previous dry-sprinkled-S04 batches tasted very sour to me (I don't like acidity in any products, perhaps a sort of individual sensibility) - and now I drink my starter-primed-S04 beers with no regrets and no sour reflections whether I should have better flushed it down the gurgler... The beer is slightly tart, of course, but nothing more than the style demands. After propagation, the yeast behaves more like M36, which i like.

Most usually I make smaller batches, 1.5 G (6L) each, so I make propotionately bigger starters: like 1/10th of the whole batch volume. It would be like 2L in a standard 5G batch, I think. I ferment to completion then cold crash my starters. And I pitch it after it has flocculated, never at high Kraeusen. I tried two- and three-stepped starters, but then the acid-lowering effect wasn't as noticeable, it kinda stabilizes after the first step. I noticed a similar effect on K97 and US05, both of which I use extensively. Even BE-134 looses quite a bit of its initial tartness when reused (which is not a good thing, however, as it's a well-balanced yeast and doesn't have any excessive twang in the first place), and to T58 propagation is outwardly detrimental as it robs it of a lot of its zest.

That's my humble experience with propagating Fermentis dry yeasts )

Cheers, interesting. I've noticed some changes with dry yeast re-use, but haven't repitched dry yeasts very often. I must do more. How does US-05 change? Cleaner? More like the liquid versions? Presumably K-97 becomes less tart like S-04?

 

[Protos]

How does US-05 change?

I didn't notice other changes than being less tart.
However, in my expericence, warmer fermentation temps seem to be more important, than repitching, in reducing US-05 tartness.
With S-04, it tastes too tart to me whatever temperature it's fermented at, unless it's repitched.

Same with K-97. It's not as tart as S-04 to begin with, still after repitching it looses some of its tartness.
I believe it's something about the drying process at Fermentis. Pitched dry, most of their yeasts have their hallmark tartness and afterwards they become more like their dry counterparts from other brands.
IDK if that's really so, but that's my experience.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I didn't notice other changes than being less tart.
However, in my expericence, warmer fermentation temps seem to be more important, than repitching, in reducing US-05 tartness.
With S-04, it tastes too tart to me whatever temperature it's fermented at, unless it's repitched.

Same with K-97. It's not as tart as S-04 to begin with, still after repitching it looses some of its tartness.
I believe it's something about the drying process at Fermentis. Pitched dry, most of their yeasts have their hallmark tartness and afterwards they become more like their dry counterparts from other brands.
IDK if that's really so, but that's my experience.

I haven't noticed a tartness from US-05, I must admit. I've never used K-97 but intend to. S-04 I've only used 2 or 3 times and not for a long time cos I wasn't keen.

I don't think many if any of the Fermentis strains are from the same sources as Lallemand's. S-33 and Windsor perhaps.

I have found that some dry yeasts on first pitch, like Nottingham, need conditioning time to lose the yeasty flavour that is apparent early on. One to 2 months, I think. Same with M36. And others. Or is it just me?!

 

[Protos]

Yep, Fermentis and Lallemand are surely not from the same source, as both are producers, not resellers, and both have their separate producing plants. It's better to compare Fermentis to Mangrove Jack's rather than to Lallemand, as MJ is a reseller and some of its yeasts are said to be repacked Fermentis, and some repacked Lallemand's. M36, f. ex., is a repacked S-04, M54 - repacked K-97, M15 - S-33 and so on. Dmtaylor's spreadsheet presents all this in details, with references.
However, I'm sure I definitely taste a difference between the original Fermentis yeasts and their repacked Mangrove Jack's versions. Almost all of Fermentis originals, pitched dry, are noticeably tarter than their MJ repacks. I don't know why. And I think MJ's versions are much better, to be honest. I prefer them to Fermentis.

Tartness in my US-05 beers comes irregularly, not every time but sometimes it does. I can't predict it. But I noticed I never get tart beers on US-05 when I repitch and ferment it warmer. So that's what I do now.

I got zero experience with yeasty flavour. Never noticed it. I can easily recall esters, alcohol, fusels, off-flavours in my beers - but nothing like yeasty... Maybe it's the same thing as the "hallmark Fermentis tartness" we are talking about, which I taste clearly while many don't at all.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Yep, Fermentis and Lallemand are surely not from the same source, as both are producers, not resellers, and both have their separate producing plants. It's better to compare Fermentis to Mangrove Jack's rather than to Lallemand, as MJ is a reseller and some of its yeasts are said to be repacked Fermentis, and some repacked Lallemand's. M36, f. ex., is a repacked S-04, M54 - repacked K-97, M15 - S-33 and so on. Dmtaylor's spreadsheet presents all this in details, with references.
However, I'm sure I definitely taste a difference between the original Fermentis yeasts and their repacked Mangrove Jack's versions. Almost all of Fermentis originals, pitched dry, are noticeably tarter than their MJ repacks. I don't know why. And I think MJ's versions are much better, to be honest. I prefer them to Fermentis.

Tartness in my US-05 beers comes irregularly, not every time but sometimes it does. I can't predict it. But I noticed I never get tart beers on US-05 when I repitch and ferment it warmer. So that's what I do now.

I got zero experience with yeasty flavour. Never noticed it. I can easily recall esters, alcohol, fusels, off-flavours in my beers - but nothing like yeasty... Maybe it's the same thing as the "hallmark Fermentis tartness" we are talking about, which I taste clearly while many don't at all.

I have read that Fermentis don't supply any other sellers, and my feeling is that no MJ yeasts are from Fermentis. I believe that MJ use blends in some packs, two strains, or one strain plus enzyme. Just my opinion. I think M36 is more like Notty plus Windsor than S04. M15 probably Windsor. M54 I don't think is K-97. I know Mauribrew is suspected to be a supplier of MJ, so maybe M54 is MB Lager, a sacch strain. M31 has two different colours, so it's obviously a blend of two things.

Just my 2p. (Pence!)

 

[dmtaylor]

MJ has to get some of their yeast from Fermentis because genetic testing proved it. Anything in purple on my sheet is from actual testing. In some cases there are no other possible equivalents.

M31, I know is some blend, so I might be 50-100% wrong on that one.

Overall my aim and hope is that my sheet/chart/table/whatever will be “close enough” about 95% of the time. It will never be 100% perfect. And a large percentage are not true equivalents — Just really closely related sisters or cousins.

I am not selling anything. I am not a geneticist. This is what you get for free. Entertainment value if nothing else.

Enjoy. Cheers.

 

[Protos]

Not just entertainment. An immensly useful tool. You know much better what to expect from your yeasts when you learn their relations between each other.
So, though it's established that some Fermentis and MJ yeasts are genetically identical, there's still a question why their identical yeats are noticeably different flavourwise in the field. It seems, the guys at MJ not just showel the powder into their branded sachets, they must add some secret ingredient to it. And mixing, of course.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

MJ has to get some of their yeast from Fermentis because genetic testing proved it. Anything in purple on my sheet is from actual testing. In some cases there are no other possible equivalents.

M31, I know is some blend, so I might be 50-100% wrong on that one.

Overall my aim and hope is that my sheet/chart/table/whatever will be “close enough” about 95% of the time. It will never be 100% perfect. And a large percentage are not true equivalents — Just really closely related sisters or cousins.

I am not selling anything. I am not a geneticist. This is what you get for free. Entertainment value if nothing else.

Enjoy. Cheers.

Cheers. Can you explain what this testing is that has proven MJ use Fermentis? Thanks.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Some interesting information about the origin of Nottingham, Windsor and London. They come from the same source.

My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits.

By way of full disclosure since Rob's email is being quoted, he was my source when I've mentioned this in the past, eg here. For those outside the UK, "a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK" doing homebrew kits in 1990 has to be a reference to Boots, the main pharmacy chain in the UK. They've also dabbled in all sorts of other things over the years, from cameras to kitchen stuff, including being probably the biggest source of homebrew stuff in the UK in the 1980s/90s. They were bought by private equity a few years ago and then sold to Walgreens.

Boots are based in Nottingham and have no particular link to London/Windsor, which perhaps suggests that the multistrain came from a London or Berkshire brewery, or had some kind of royal connection? For instance, Shepherd Neame now have a warrant from Prince Charles, but who knows who had the warrants back in 1990, allegedly Prince Philip was a big fan of Double Diamond back in the day but then switched his loyalty to Boddington.

Boots certainly sold the EDME yeast (similar to S-33/Windsor) at one point, but rather more than 30 years ago. So I speculate that what happened was that EDME tried to screw them on price or there was some other problem, so Boots called their bluff and went to Lallemand saying "We know the EDME yeast originally came from Brewery X, here's a sample of the multi-strain from Brewery X, can you find the one like the EDME strain and make it for us?" But when looking for the equivalent of "Windsor", they found Notty and the better flocculation won out.

 

[dmtaylor]

Cheers. Can you explain what this testing is that has proven MJ use Fermentis? Thanks.

Shoot -- I misspoke. Great question. I am in fact not aware of testing of MJ yeasts. So these are still educated guesses at this point. Sorry about this.

I still believe, however, that MJ does get some of their yeasts from Fermentis. Whether this is a round-about way, or how exactly, I do not know. I don't know whether or how anybody could disprove this theory, as it just makes the most sense in many cases, like for many/most of the Belgians.

Fun stuff to think & argue about though, ain't it!?

Cheers.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Shoot -- I misspoke. Great question. I am in fact not aware of testing of MJ yeasts. So these are still educated guesses at this point. Sorry about this.

I still believe, however, that MJ does get some of their yeasts from Fermentis. Whether this is a round-about way, or how exactly, I do not know. I don't know whether or how anybody could disprove this theory, as it just makes the most sense in many cases, like for many/most of the Belgians.

Fun stuff to think & argue about though, ain't it!?

Cheers.

No worries. I've used both M36 and S04 and I'm pretty confident they are not the same.

So purple does not mean tested?

I'm just not convinced MJ uses Fermentis, I've found no two the same as yet, but I'm happy to be proven wrong, I just want to learn. Appreciate all attempts and sharing opinions and knowledge.

 

[dmtaylor]

No worries. I've used both M36 and S04 and I'm pretty confident they are not the same.

So purple does not mean tested?

I'm just not convinced MJ uses Fermentis, I've found no two the same as yet, but I'm happy to be proven wrong, I just want to learn. Appreciate all attempts and sharing opinions and knowledge.

Users are better off ignoring the color scheme, purple and so on, they don't mean much of anything anymore. I'll consider getting rid of the colors.

I hope this list encourages people to run more yeast experiments. I split every batch to try different yeasts, and I've been surprised by the results more often than not.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I have read that Fermentis don't supply any other sellers

Hmmm...the Cellar Science offering sure look a lot like the offerings from Fermentis: CellarScience | MoreBeer

I think I have only used their "Cali" yeast and have not done a side by side with US-05. I cannot quite figure out the Cellar Science brand. They seem to be related to, owned, or a brand of More Beer, but my local shop carries them and some other online vendors carry them as well.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I hope this list encourages people to run more yeast experiments. I split every batch to try different yeasts, and I've been surprised by the results more often than not.

I have been picking up a number of 1 gallon fermenters lately and stocking up on dry yeasts. I hope to run a number of yeast trials (mostly for myself as I try to incorporate dry yeast more into my brewing), but will also likely include some Fermentis vs MJ vs Lallemand (maybe with some "equivalent" White Labs and Wyeast in the mix).

 

[duncan_disorderly]

My take on MJ yeasts...

M12 Kveik Voss - Lallemand Voss
M15 Empire - Windsor
M20 Bavarian Wheat - Lallemand Danstar Munich? Pure guess, never used Munich
M21 Belgian Wit - not used it.
M29 French Saison - Belle Saison probably.
M31 Belgian Tripel - is a blend
M36 Liberty Bell - Notty + Windsor?
M41 Belgian Ale - not used it
M42 New World - Nottingham.
M44 West Coast - Lallemand Bry-97
M47 Belgian Abbey - not used it yet. Lallemand Abbaye?
M54 Cali Lager - possibly Mauribrew Lager? Not tart like K-97 is described.
M76 Bav Lager - sacch + pastorianus acc to MJ website (sacch + Diamond?)
M84 Boho Lager - is a sacch strain acc to MJ website.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

However, I'm sure I definitely taste a difference between the original Fermentis yeasts and their repacked Mangrove Jack's versions. Almost all of Fermentis originals, pitched dry, are noticeably tarter than their MJ repacks. I don't know why. And I think MJ's versions are much better, to be honest. I prefer them to Fermentis.

If they were repacked they wouldn't be different, surely. I believe they are not Fermentis. That's the simple explanation. I've used a lot of the dry yeasts from Lallemand, Fermentis and MJ and I don't see equivalences between Fermentis and MJ, from my own experience. I think they are mostly Lallemand, including blends and enzymes. Nutrients perhaps. I could be wrong, of course. Just trying to add my experience to the debate.

 

[Protos]

Well, that's possible. Then again, I wouldn't say most MJ yeasts are much closer to their Lallemand's counterparts rather than to Fermentis' ones (except, perhaps, Nott and Kveik).
M20 and Classic Munich, for example, are quite different, Belle is less 'juicy' than M29, M15 is fruitier than Windsor, and so on.
Whichver producer they repack (I believe both, and even probably some other) no MJ yeast tastes to me exactly the same as its supposed counterpart in Fermentis or Lallemand range. Sometimes close, but never exactly the same. Which still leaves a question: what MJ do to their repacked yeasts to get that effect?

 

[dmtaylor]

M84 Boho Lager - is a sacch strain acc to MJ website.

Everything (or dang near) is Saccharomyces. The different species are generally between pastorianus vs. cerevisiae -- perhaps that is what you meant?

But from what I can tell, MJ is still reporting M84 as "bottom-fermenting lager".

https://mangrovejacks.com/products/m84-bohemian-lager-10g

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Well, that's possible. Then again, I wouldn't say most MJ yeasts are much closer to their Lallemand's counterparts rather than to Fermentis' ones (except, perhaps, Nott and Kveik).
M20 and Classic Munich, for example, are quite different, Belle is less 'juicy' than M29, M15 is fruitier than Windsor, and so on.
Whichver producer they repack (I believe both, and even probably some other) no MJ yeast tastes to me exactly the same as its supposed counterpart in Fermentis or Lallemand range. Sometimes close, but never exactly the same. Which still leaves a question: what MJ do to their repacked yeasts to get that effect?

That's a good question, but I do believe the MJ range is much closer to the Lallemand range than Fermentis. Just based on my taste buds and batches I've brewed. I think MJ tinkers with a few though.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Everything (or dang near) is Saccharomyces. The different species are generally between pastorianus vs. cerevisiae -- perhaps that is what you meant?

But from what I can tell, MJ is still reporting M84 as "bottom-fermenting lager".

https://mangrovejacks.com/products/m84-bohemian-lager-10g

Yes cerevisiae sorry.

https://help.mangrovejacks.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019268213-What-species-of-yeast-do-you-use-

 

[dmtaylor]

https://help.mangrovejacks.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019268213-What-species-of-yeast-do-you-use-

Ugh. Looks like MJ is about as inconsistent and untimely with updating their documentation as all the other manufacturers.

So it's really anybody's guess, until we can get these MJ strains tested.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

@CascadesBrewer have you seen/listened to the occasional Basic Brewing Radio episodes where people talk about brewing split batches with different yeast strains? From the show notes, there are a couple of episodes where they talk about split batches with dry yeast.

Also, if there are people are going to give this a try and are willing to share their base recipe, it would be possible for others to brew along, compare notes, etc.

 

[Protos]

Looks like MJ is about as inconsistent and untimely with updating their documentation

I have three their yeast catalogues: v.1, v.3 and v.9, and M76 is listed firstly as cerevisiae then as cerevisiae+pastorianus, and M84 shown as cerevisiae throughout. And yes, both "are bottom-fermented lager yeasts". It seems MJ stick rather to German (rather than American Craft) terminological tradition, where Lager is anything that's lagered, whatever the yeast species.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

Also, if there are people are going to give this a try and are willing to share their base recipe, it would be possible for others to brew along, compare notes, etc.

I am not sure I am that organized! I will often brew 5 gallons of wort and split that into two fermenters. I just recently brewed 3 gallons of a Saison recipe and split them with WLP565, Belle Saison, and Omega Voss. That batch is bottle conditioning now. I have a Tripel fermenting with M31 Tripel Ale (not split) checking if that is more of a Trappist style yeast or a Saison.

I will probably be another month or two before I do another round. I will probably brew a simple Belgian-ish recipe (something like a 5% Single) and throw a number of Belgian-ish yeasts.

 

[Protos]

M31 is supposed to be a Saison and is listed as close to BE-134 in the spreadsheet. And it behaves much like a Saison yeast. But I've never tasted anything Saisony from it. In my experience, it's a fine Trappist-style yeast, much closer to M41 than to M29 or BE-134. Recently I used it in a Karmeliet Tripel recipe from 1679, and I love the beer. Very good yeast.

 

[dmtaylor]

M31 is supposed to be a Saison and is listed as close to BE-134 in the spreadsheet. And it behaves much like a Saison yeast. But I've never tasted anything Saisony from it. In my experience, it's a fine Trappist-style yeast, much closer to M41 than to M29 or BE-134. Recently I used it in a Karmeliet Tripel recipe from 1679, and I love the beer. Very good yeast.

Thanks for the recipe and experience... But how did it TASTE??

 

[Northern_Brewer]

M20 Bavarian Wheat - Lallemand Danstar Munich? Pure guess, never used Munich
M21 Belgian Wit - not used it.
M29 French Saison - Belle Saison probably.

No probably about M29 and Belle, they are the same.

Given that Munich is meant to have less character than Munich Classic, and Munich is now sold as a wit yeast, without any direct experience I'd assume M20 was Munich Classic and M21 is Munich/Wit.

MJ may have the odd Fermentis but they definitely seem to mainly map to Lallemand. I saw something where they said they try to have two options in most categories, which explains why they eg have so many lager yeasts.

If I was white-labelling yeasts, I'd be putting 10% Notty into most of them just to make them stick. Maybe less important for US market, but definitely for UK market where conditioning in bottles and pressure kegs is the norm.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

No probably about M29 and Belle, they are the same.

Given that Munich is meant to have less character than Munich Classic, and Munich is now sold as a wit yeast, without any direct experience I'd assume M20 was Munich Classic and M21 is Munich/Wit.

MJ may have the odd Fermentis but they definitely seem to mainly map to Lallemand. I saw something where they said they try to have two options in most categories, which explains why they eg have so many lager yeasts.

If I was white-labelling yeasts, I'd be putting 10% Notty into most of them just to make them stick. Maybe less important for US market, but definitely for UK market where conditioning in bottles and pressure kegs is the norm.

M20 doesn't have a huge amount of character, if it's Munich Classic I would imagine it's a diluted version.

If MJ has any Fermentis I've yet to come across one that has tasted like one. Not tasted them all yet though. I've tasted M15, M20, M29, M31, M36, M41, M42, M44, M54 and M76. I don't believe any of those are Fermentis. Unless they've been tampered with/blended or something.

 

[dmtaylor]

M20 doesn't have a huge amount of character, if it's Munich Classic I would imagine it's a diluted version.

If MJ has any Fermentis I've yet to come across one that has tasted like one. Not tasted them all yet though. I've tasted M15, M20, M29, M31, M36, M41, M42, M44, M54 and M76. I don't believe any of those are Fermentis. Unless they've been tampered with/blended or something.

Methinks M20 is actually Mauri Weiss, and neither of which are the same as Munich Classic.

I would further challenge you (or anyone else) to think about what the equivalents might be for the following MJ yeasts, which don't seem to have good options from Lallemand:

M31 Tripel (likely BE-134 or WB-06, at least in part)
M47 Abbey (ditto)
M41 Belgian (BE-256?)
M36 Liberty (S-04 or US-05)
M84 Bohemian (S-23 or W-34/70)

If Lallemand is making equivalents of any of these, I haven't seen them, except maybe for their Abbaye and brand-new Farmhouse strains. Even then, their actual apparent attenuations probably mismatch. And if you think you've found great matches, then feel free to provide your objectively verifiable reasoning why/how.

I think MJ gets quite a good bit of their yeast from Fermentis, or otherwise they might indeed be concocting some pretty interesting mixtures on their own, for which to date, many including myself haven't yet given them enough credit. My guess leans towards... they probably use some Fermentis... regardless of whether Fermentis knows or cares. But I can only guess.

 

[kmarkstevens]

Also, if there are people are going to give this a try and are willing to share their base recipe, it would be possible for others to brew along, compare notes, etc.

FYI, I do spilt batches quite a bit at random intervals. I've got too many yeasties in my bank and want to thin the herd, so have been doing blind yeast offs and discarding a few.

Most folks use a simple SMASHY recipe. You might want to consider that yeasts behave differently with different adjuncts as well. I did an English porter yeast off and was gob smacked to discover one yeast had chocolate notes (S-04) and the other yeast (WLP085) had none. If it had been a simple SMASH recipe, I would have completely missed that. So, in my humble opinion, not only is it yeast vs yeast, but even yeast vs yeast per style.

And you can blend yeasts. For example, I really like S-04 (whitbread dry) & WLP017 (one of the whitbread liquid multi strains) blended. To my palate and that of the local HBS, the blend was superior. White Labs has a Guide To Blending Yeast Strains.

@dmtaylor Love your hobby, and that you are actually verifying (as much as possible) the different strains. There are tons of interweb sites that simply repeat some WAG from a few decades ago. But you have carefully vetted and curated a dang impressive list.

I have one that might pass your muster. WLP085 is a blend of WLP002 and something else, most likely speculation has it as WLP006 or WLP007. I've emailed and asked the San Diego bartender (who didn't really know his yeast) and got the "can't disclose" answer. Well, the example used in White Labs Guide To Blending Yeast Strains slide 8 Goal 2: Improving Yeast Performance uses WLP002 and WLP007 as the second example. Absent Chris White spilling the beans, I submit this is confirmation, but it's your spreadsheet.

 

[Miraculix]

FYI, I do spilt batches quite a bit at random intervals. I've got too many yeasties in my bank and want to thin the herd, so have been doing blind yeast offs and discarding a few.

Most folks use a simple SMASHY recipe. You might want to consider that yeasts behave differently with different adjuncts as well. I did an English porter yeast off and was gob smacked to discover one yeast had chocolate notes (S-04) and the other yeast (WLP085) had none. If it had been a simple SMASH recipe, I would have completely missed that. So, in my humble opinion, not only is it yeast vs yeast, but even yeast vs yeast per style.

And you can blend yeasts. For example, I really like S-04 (whitbread dry) & WLP017 (one of the whitbread liquid multi strains) blended. To my palate and that of the local HBS, the blend was superior. White Labs has a Guide To Blending Yeast Strains.

@dmtaylor Love your hobby, and that you are actually verifying (as much as possible) the different strains. There are tons of interweb sites that simply repeat some WAG from a few decades ago. But you have carefully vetted and curated a dang impressive list.

I have one that might pass your muster. WLP085 is a blend of WLP002 and something else, most likely speculation has it as WLP006 or WLP007. I've emailed and asked the San Diego bartender (who didn't really know his yeast) and got the "can't disclose" answer. Well, the example used in White Labs Guide To Blending Yeast Strains slide 8 Goal 2: Improving Yeast Performance uses WLP002 and WLP007 as the second example. Absent Chris White spilling the beans, I submit this is confirmation, but it's your spreadsheet.

Just to 2nd what you wrote about s04, I really don't like this yeast in a pale beer. But in a stout, it is truly marvelous and has yet to find it's true competitor in my dark beers. I cannot say why, but it does stuff. And this stuff is really good in dark beers.

Recently, I've been imagining a dragon stout clone-ish type of beer with it. The fruitiness will fit perfectly.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Methinks M20 is actually Mauri Weiss, and neither of which are the same as Munich Classic.

I would further challenge you (or anyone else) to think about what the equivalents might be for the following MJ yeasts, which don't seem to have good options from Lallemand:

M31 Tripel (likely BE-134 or WB-06, at least in part)
M47 Abbey (ditto)
M41 Belgian (BE-256?)
M36 Liberty (S-04 or US-05)
M84 Bohemian (S-23 or W-34/70)

If Lallemand is making equivalents of any of these, I haven't seen them, except maybe for their Abbaye and brand-new Farmhouse strains. Even then, their actual apparent attenuations probably mismatch. And if you think you've found great matches, then feel free to provide your objectively verifiable reasoning why/how.

I think MJ gets quite a good bit of their yeast from Fermentis, or otherwise they might indeed be concocting some pretty interesting mixtures on their own, for which to date, many including myself haven't yet given them enough credit. My guess leans towards... they probably use some Fermentis... regardless of whether Fermentis knows or cares. But I can only guess.

M31 is a blend. I don't know what.
M36 is neither S04 nor US-05 in my opinion. I've used it quite a lot. My guess is a blend Notty/Windsor. I've seen firm and powdery sediment, and the character of the beers seemed right. And Notty/Windsor is a common blend in the UK.
M41 - likely a blend, similar to M31
M47 - not used it yet, have a pack.
M84 - not used it.

They may use some Fermentis, Ive just yet to try anything that convinced me. Whereas M42 must be Nottingham, M44 must be Bry-97. M36 and S04 are different. Is there any single MJ yeast which anybody could confidently say is Fermentis? And I doubt they could use the quantities they'd need without Fermentis knowing.

I've used M20 and MB Weiss a few times each. They seemed different to me.

 

[Kold Brygg]

My guess is that the picture is more complicated. There are more yeast producers than Fermentis, Lallemand and Mauribrew.

CrossMyLoof are rumoured to have some of their yeasts from Germany, I think @Northern_Brewer provided this information. There is a Swedish company producing beer yeast. I've been in touch with them, when asking about beer yeast, they say they produce on behalf of AEB. AEB says they don't produce yeast for others than AEB.

The AEB yeasts are very similar to Fermentis yeasts. So even if they seems very similar it seems unlikely they get them from Fermentis. Why should AEB get yeast from Fermentis, when they have a another factory producing them? This might be case for other brands also.

I find @dmtaylor 's spreadsheet very useful, some of his connections might not be accurate, but it gives an clear indication, in most cases that's what I need. And I like the colours. If you consider changing, I hope you at least keep the ones confirmed one way or another.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

DMT's spreadsheet is really useful, it shows similar yeasts across different suppliers, wet and dry.

The MJ rep I spoke to said they repackage some strains and have some "produced for them", but he was very wary, didn't want to tell me anything. I think MJ packages stuff in England and tests out blends and additions to tweak existing dry strains to provide some improved/different options. So I don't think many MJ packages are exactly the same as anything else. Not sure how many though. M42 and M44 seem obvious.