Safale yeasts

[MattHollingsworth]

Did a search and didn't see a real discussion about the quality of these yeasts. If you have experience with them, please add to the poll and tell me what you think. I can order these yeasts from Belgium easily. I can also order liquid yeasts, but a package takes about a week to arrive here without refrigeration.

 

[jeansberg]

It depends on the style of beer you want to brew. If you want a Belgian ale or a German wheat beer you need the appropriate liquid yeast to get the best results. I think dry yeast is just as good as liquid yeast for more standard beers, like all kind of American and English ales, for example.

 

[MattHollingsworth]

Thanks.

Anybody know what the equivalent is for their British yeast, the S-04? I see the US-05 is the Chico yeast but can't find what their Brit yeast is equivalent to in Wyeast or what commercial brewery it's based on.

 

[MattHollingsworth]

Aha!

Found this link, which says that S-04 is equivalent to Wyeast 1099.

http://www.babbrewers.com/files/story/2005/03/2005-03-DriedYeast.pdf

 

[jeansberg]

For Belgian Wit, Strong Golden Ale and Tripel – Safbrew T-58 produced better Belgian beers
than any liquid culture I have ever used.

The above is a quote from your source I think a lot of brewers here would disagree with as most threads about T-58 on this forum are rather negative. I don't know if I would trust this guy's opinions.

 

[MattHollingsworth]

The above is a quote from your source I think a lot of brewers here would disagree with as most threads about T-58 on this forum are rather negative. I don't know if I would trust this guy's opinions.

Thanks for the info. I was just referring to the S-04 being 1099 part of that link....

 

[Droot]

I have had good luck with S-04, not so good luck with S-05. One instance each. I usually use liquid with an appropriate starter. I hydrated the S-05 and think I killed the yeast. Ferment was slow and beer is terrible. Perhaps you could blame the brewer for that one.

I made a Boddingtons clone with the S-04 and it is good.

Still staying with liquid.

David

 

[elkdog]

I use the S-05 and S-04 a lot, and like both quite a bit. The S-04 is nice for a fairly clean English Ale, and the S-05 is the Chico strain- clean and fast. Since I primarily brew American and English style ales, I only buy liquid yeast when I need a particular characteristic, such as lower attenuation coupled with good flocculation. S-04, S-05 and Nottingham account for the vast majority of my brews. The ease of use and lower price, even with recent increases, makes them preferable to me, though I wouldn't say they're better- they are about the same, but easier to use.

 

[wild]

I use both and for what dry yeasts that are available, I believe are better due to the amount of cells per packet compared to their liquid counterparts. The only reason I've gone back to liquid when I have is there was no dry version for the style I was brewing. For all beers under 1.060 I don't re-hydrate, just sprinkle on top. For all 1.060 and above I make a starter 24 hours in advance. Never an issue.

 

[menschmaschine]

I think, generally speaking, all of Fermentis' dry yeasts are as good as their equivalent liquid counterparts, if they exist. I did a thread of liquid/dry yeast equivalents after scouring the internet for info.

Regarding S-04, I think overall it is a great yeast. It has a specific ester profile that, to me, is better in certain English styles than others. I found it delicious for a stout, but not so for a light-colored bitter. That's just personal preference though. It was still good, I just wanted more fruitiness... it was more phenolic than fruity. But that bitter was fermented low in the temp range. Perhaps a warmer fermentation would have produced a different ester profile.

 

[MattHollingsworth]

Thanks for the info.

 

[Beerrific]

I use the Chico strain a lot. I have used both wlp001 and US-05. I have found that US-05 leaves a very distinctive taste and aroma to the beer after it is done fermenting. I have found that this will drop out after a couple weeks of cold conditioning. It is really hard to describe this flavor/aroma, it is not really a bad thing, just distinct.

With wlp001 I do not get this, no real distinct flavors and aromas at all. If I need the beer to drink fast I go to the liquid yeast, if I have time for it to age cold I will go US-05. Also, the US-05 always attenuates well, this can be bad or good. If there is ever a case where I care if the FG is a point or 2 lower than I am expecting, I will stay away from the US-05.

 

[jschaf]

maybe off topic but is it easy to kill the yeast when rehydrating?

 

[elkdog]

maybe off topic but is it easy to kill the yeast when rehydrating?

Only if you get'em too hot- above 105F or so. Rehydrate them in water around 70F, and you shouldn't have any troubles. Yeast are tough.

 

[Big10Seaner]

The directions say "sprinkle into wort" which is what I've done every time with the S-05 and haven't had any problems, I really like this yeast.

 

[Coastarine]

I voted "just as good" but to elaborate - I think that US-05 is just as good as wlp001 or 1056 and S04 is as good as a comparable liquid english strain. They obviously don't compare to the huge variety of other liquid strains that are available such as cal common, belgian strains, etc, which are not really available in dry form.

 

[jschaf]

thanks, i think i'll stick with this yeast for awhile and keep the hops to a minimum and make those delicious malty beers for dirt cheap. I've been straight addicted to Sottish Ales lately, but haven't brewed one yet.

 

[menschmaschine]

The directions say "sprinkle into wort" which is what I've done every time with the S-05 and haven't had any problems, I really like this yeast.

Those instructions are geared towards the homebrewer. The directions also give the option to rehydrate. Sprinkling dry yeast right onto wort will invariably destroy some of the yeast cells*, but the consequences are often negligible enough not to be noticeable to the homebrewer.

---------

*When dried yeast cells go through the rehydration process (in wort or in water), they do not have adequate control what passes through their cell membranes. If they rehydrate in water, nothing in normal water can kill them. If they rehydrate in wort, sugars and other wort constituents are permitted through the cell membrane unchecked. This can lead to cell death.

Take maltose, for example. Under normal yeast metabolism, maltose is broken down to simpler sugars by an enzyme excreted by the yeast before it passes through the cell membrane. If it gets through without being broken down, the yeast cell may not be able to deal with it.

 

[david_42]

I've also had good results with Saflager-23, haven't tried the other ones. Dry wheat yeasts will produce something closer to an American Wheat rather than a Wit.

 

[menschmaschine]

I've also had good results with Saflager-23, haven't tried the other ones.

Saflager W-34/70 is awesome. My Helles recipe brewed with this (2-packs per 5 gallons rehydrated) tastes identical to the same recipe brewed with WLP830... actually it was even better (cleaner) because I was probably pitching the 830 a little low (in pitch rate).

 

[Pangea]

My 3 lagers made with W34/70 have all been awesome and clean.

My favorite yeast to use, period, is US-05. I've used it in everything from wheats to IPA to regular pale ale to english brown and also light blonde pilsner type ales. All have been really good. I NEVER rehydrate and pitch one pack. Fermentations always attenuate properly and flocculate if I use kettle finings.

In summary - I think fermentis dry yeasts are the shizzle.

 

[jschaf]

interesting stuff here... to me it's an obvious choice to go for safale dry yeast over liquid.

 

[MattHollingsworth]

I'll try the US-05 sometime in the future for sure.

 

[z987k]

US-05 = wlp001 = wyeast 1056. I really like this strain of yeast and the dry is cheaper and easier to use, so I do. It is my go to yeast for a clean ale. US-04 I think is wyeast 1099(whitbread) and I do like it for porters and stouts.
Never tried the lager yeasts, but I plan to. The hefe and wit dry yeasts suck.

 

[neuron555]

I recently used WB-06 when my LHBS was out of Bavarian wheat liquid yeast. There are diverging opinions on this with some people very negative and some positive. I just sprinkled it on the wort and had fermentation starting in 90 minutes. I got very good ester/clove production. I started out above 70 degrees and had a very strong banana smell, so I dropped it to around 62. The banana taste now is subtle, but I suspect that this ferments better on the higher end.

Hard to say how it compares with the Weihenstephan strain, but certainly was fine and there is no doubt it is a German style wheat.

 

[mmb]

I love S-04 and US-05. Picked up a few packets of S-23 and W-34/70 to give them a whirl. With all the positives posts on both of those yeasts on HBT it's a pretty safe gamble.

 

[Scooby_Brew]

I love US-05! I use it a lot for the APA, American Red, American Wheat, Cream Ale, etc. etc. I use S-04 for my Brown Ale. The W34/70 is a great European Lagers yeast - no wonder the European commercial breweries use it so much...

 

[Teacher]

US-05 is my go-to yeast. I've made the same recipe twice with US-05 and 1056 and just couldn't tell a difference, so dry it is. S-04 is great, too. Naturally, as others have said, there are some specialty strains that just aren't available dry, but for my "general" brewing (typical American and British styles), I love these strains.

 

[Tonedef131]

W34/70 is awesome, US-05 is pretty good, and the rest of them are mediocre at best.

 

[ldgenius2000]

My LHBS didn't have any liquid yeast for a wit in stock and so I tried WB-06. I was quite impressed by how well it approximated the wit. The spices (coriander and grains of paradise) helped I'm sure, but it definitely did not have the banana esters or other elements of a Hef which was nice.