WLP001 Dry

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.

redrocker652002

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2022
Messages
1,636
Reaction score
1,358
Location
South San Francisco CA
Been doing some reading and a recipe I found calls for WLP001 liquid. But, not ever having much luck with liquids in the past, I saw that there is a WLP001 dry version. Has anybody tried it and how were the results? I have a package of BRY97 that I could use but not sure if that would be the same thing. Any input is always welcome. Rock On!!!!!
 
Too rich for my blood.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20230801-111029.png
    Screenshot_20230801-111029.png
    86.7 KB · Views: 0
A quick price check of "the usual" online places (ritebrew, amazon, ...) shows US-05 is available for around $3.50 per package (including shipping).

I have a package of BRY97 that I could use but not sure if that would be the same thing.
BRY-97 is a often a reasonable substitute for the various "chico" strains (WLP001 liquid, US-05, ...).

WLP001 dry version
I have a sachet (from back when one of the online stores was offering it free with a $89-ish purchase); but haven't used it yet. I wanted to refine my SNPA-inspired recipe before doing a split fermentation with it.
 
My LHBS sells US-05 sachets for $4. (S-04 is the same; S-33 is $3; T-58 is $3.50; almost every other beer yeast they carry is crazy overpriced.)
 
My bad, I asked Amazon and these are the first items listed for "US-05 yeast" when the filter is set "Low to High" price.

1690915204042.png


Cheers!
 
My bad, I asked Amazon and these are the first items listed for "US-05 yeast" when the filter is set "Low to High" price.
Yeah, Amazon is often rather expensive for small, cheap items due to the "free" shipping. You can get yeast in 3 or 5 packs for decent prices (though I am never sure how well it is stored).

I have found that Label Peelers is the cheapest if you want just 1 or 2 packs and their price includes shipping (US-05 for $4.60 right now). Ritebrew is the cheapest if you are getting a few packs, and they have a further discount with 10+ packs of yeast (1 pack of US-05 with shipping showed as $6.05).

Though I do usually try to pick up dry yeast packs at my local shop as I know they can use the business (US-05 at $4.99) and I am lucky to still have a local shop.
 
Ok, so if I am reading this right, BRY97 would be an ok sub for dry WLP001? I might order the dry WLP001 just to see what happens. I am going to do a bit more research on how to cultivate yeast from the slurry of a brewed beer though, as it seems the prices are going up and for the cost of a few mason jars I can have a few strains at my ready. Any additional comments regarding dry WLP001 or anything else are always welcomed. Rock On!!!!!!!
 
It'll likely be September before I could write with actual experience wrt BRY-97 vs the other "Chico associated" strains I have used (wlp001, wy1056, us-05) but I was drawn by this article - and a goal to replicate the original Ballantine IPA - to give BRY-97 a try The Complete Guide to the "Chico" Strain of Yeast - Beer Maverick

Cheers!
 
It'll likely be September before I could write with actual experience wrt BRY-97 vs the other "Chico associated" strains I have used (wlp001, wy1056, us-05) but I was drawn by this article - and a goal to replicate the original Ballantine IPA - to give BRY-97 a try The Complete Guide to the "Chico" Strain of Yeast - Beer Maverick

Cheers!
I have had great luck with BRY97. It started a bit slow for me, but once it gets going it is a beast, at least in my experience. The beers I have done finished very clean and clear. I liked it and will continue to use it when appropriate. (LIsten to me talking like a pro, when in reality, a novice at best. LOL)

Also, awesome read on the yeasts I have used. I am glad to see that most of what I have used is interchangeable and I can sub if needed. So, BRY97 will be used instead of WLP001 as I have an extra packet of it on hand. Rock On!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
A joke of such kind also means the entire article's a BS and tells nothing on the real origin of the strain :( A German brewer with a German yeast in the middle of an Angloscottish Fairyland, really?
What a shame for such an otherwise reliable website.

I'm rather ready to believe Chico may be descending from one of those Kölsch-like strains German immigrants brought to the US in the last half of the 19th century, The "German takeover" of the previously mostly British-fashioned American brewing scene of the time is a well-documented process.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, have seen that already. That's most probably true, the exact origin is unknown. Why then the Mavericks disinform the readers?

Where on earth "Jigsaw, Puzzleshire" is located? Next to Unicornshire, I may speculate? There's no such location on the British Isles as far as I know. It sounds like a made up nonexistent location. That's why I call this a BS.
If someone might drop GPS coordinates for the place, I'm ready to change my opinion and to expand my scope of the British geography.
As yet though, all my googling for "Jigsaw, Puzzleshire" returns the same Chico origin topics.
 
Thanks, have seen that already.
That was my assumption.

OTOH, there are a lot of people here who don't follow links.

My thought is that the writer(s) at Beer Maverick searched long and hard for the source of BRY-97 and didn't find a true source. The reference to the blog and fake brewery is perhaps a little "inside baseball".
 
Plenty of folks on this forum report storing dry yeast in the freezer. Damage to yeast from freezing comes from ice crystals. No water means no ice means no damage. Theoretically, anyway.
 
Plenty of folks on this forum report storing dry yeast in the freezer. Damage to yeast from freezing comes from ice crystals. No water means no ice means no damage. Theoretically, anyway.
I keep mine in the fridge. But I use little dry yeast. I’ve been a liquid yeast guy from my first batch. 25 years ago things were different and dry yeast was not as good as it is today. Back then nobody would touch dry yeast. It was stuff that came in a white unmarked packet under the lid of a malt extract kit. And the first thing you did was throw it away.

How anybody can say they don’t have luck with liquid yeast is beyond me. You have multiple companies now with a wide variety of strains for everything under the sun, 1084 is supposedly Guinness yeast, 1056 is supposedly Sierra Nevada’s yeast, 1272 is supposedly from Anchor, etc. To me, that was always the selling point for the liquid yeast - that I can brew with the same yeast these companies do. I understand people say some of that is debunked, but not really. If you go back and look, these yeast companies are telling you where the yeast came from. Gee, “Rocky Mountain Lager Yeast.” Or “Canadian/Belgian Ale Yeast” Or the one that says its the most popular lager strain in the world. If you don’t get this, you’re not paying attention.
 
How anybody can say they don’t have luck with liquid yeast is beyond me. You have multiple companies now with a wide variety of strains for everything under the sun, 1084 is supposedly Guinness yeast, 1056 is supposedly Sierra Nevada’s yeast, 1272 is supposedly from Anchor, etc. To me, that was always the selling point for the liquid yeast - that I can brew with the same yeast these companies do. I understand people say some of that is debunked, but not really. If you go back and look, these yeast companies are telling you where the yeast came from. Gee, “Rocky Mountain Lager Yeast.” Or “Canadian/Belgian Ale Yeast” Or the one that says its the most popular lager strain in the world. If you don’t get this, you’re not paying attention.
Well, since I was the one who said it, I will just say that has been my experience. Maybe I am just not the pro as you are yet, or maybe I am just not good enough, who knows. I have tried liquid twice and both times I had to add dry to get the fermentation going. So, sorry that it is beyond you, but I was just speaking on my experience. Take it for what it is worth, and trust me, it isn't worth all that much. LOL. Have a great day.
 
How anybody can say they don’t have luck with liquid yeast is beyond me.
Then why do you suppose White Labs decided to start selling dry yeast?

The primary selling point of dry yeast has always been simplicity and the primary selling point of liquid yeast has always been variety. Dry yeast is also generally cheaper, easier to ship without compromising viability, and has much longer shelf life.
 
Been doing some reading and a recipe I found calls for WLP001 liquid. But, not ever having much luck with liquids in the past, I saw that there is a WLP001 dry version. Has anybody tried it and how were the results? I have a package of BRY97 that I could use but not sure if that would be the same thing. Any input is always welcome. Rock On!!!!!
You'd be better off searching for an existing thread where it's already been discussed quite a bit such as this one, which also has White Labs' own comparison of dy versus liquid yeast :
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/thread...yeast-coming-soon.725202/page-3#post-10252804
The dry one won't be much different, it's just a really expensive way to buy yeast that's little different to other dried Chicos when all's said and done.

BRY-97 is a often a reasonable substitute for the various "chico" strains (WLP001 liquid, US-05, ...).
BRY-97 is not a substitute for a Chico strain, it *is* a Chico strain. It appears to be near-as-dammit a dried version of Wyeast 1056. But as has been noted, it tends to take a while to get going. See the family tree of Chicos in this post, assume that by Imperial M44 they mean MJ M44 which is generally considered to be a repacked BRY-97, then go down to the bottom of the page where a more recent paper suggests BRY-97 is closer to 1056 than US-05, which is still a pretty close cousin of 1056. It's all a bit indirect, but it seems to point to a consistent story. WLP001 is in a separate subgroup of Chicos to 1056/US-05.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/thread...f-white-labs-yeast.642831/page-2#post-8916547
I am never sure how well it is stored
Dry yeast goes off really slowly. I've had dry bread yeast sat in a cupboard at ambient temperature and it still had 40-50% viability after 20 years, it could still make bread albeit not as fluffy as brand new. But on that basis, it goes off at a rate of a few percent per year, even at ambient temperature, so I wouldn't worry too much about how it is stored as long as you're not leaving it for decades.
 
Two launched, one to go (?) - Back early May, BeerSmith podcast #280 (with Chris White) in the segment on dry yeast (starting at about minute 43:30) three strains were mentioned.
 
Dry yeast goes off really slowly. I've had dry bread yeast sat in a cupboard at ambient temperature and it still had 40-50% viability after 20 years, it could still make bread albeit not as fluffy as brand new. But on that basis, it goes off at a rate of a few percent per year, even at ambient temperature, so I wouldn't worry too much about how it is stored as long as you're not leaving it for decades.
Yeah. I am still a little nervous about dry yeast packs sitting on a shelf in an Amazon warehouse or shipping dry yeast during the summer months, but maybe I should not be. A while back I was given a Brewer's Best Kit that sat around for a year after a cancelled event. The cans of extract were 1-3 months past the best buy date, and resulting "IPA" looked like a brown ale and tasted like toasted cardboard...but that pack of US-05 worked like a champ! I brew with 90% dry yeast these days, and I have no issues with using a pack that has been around for 3 years.

But I will likely stick with my local shop, or vendors like MoreBeer, Label Peelers or Ritebrew for dry yeast.
 
It is a made up nonexistent location. That's the point. It's obvious, over-the-top BS. That is, a joke.
No it isn't a joke. And it wasn't obvious to anyone here. Even the Original Poster said " I missed that the first time."
Not many of BeerMaverick's readers are supposed to be experts on British shires for "the joke" to be "obvious" to them.

Sloppy (or maybe drunken) sciencing, that's what it's called, and not a joke.
 
Have to disagree. I got it the first time and I suspect that more than 90% of the audience did too. It is in fact quite celar that there is no such actual place as Jiggsaw, Puzzleshire. At least to native speakers of English. Maybe you aren't one and maybe they shouldn't have tried to joke about it in that forum, but I'm sorry, it really is obvious.
 
From what I can web search, the BeerMaverick article has been around since late August 2020 (link to Internet Archives). The Anspach & Hobday article is dated Apr 2020 (but Internet Archives didn't capture it until some time in 2023).

But wait, there's more :eek::


I suspect that web search won't solve the mystery of the source of BRY-97.
 
I'm not a native English speaker but here's not a hard case to distinguish between a pun, a joke and a blunder, especially when working with texts on history topics has been my job for several decades. When such a turn appears in a text that otherwise looks fully credible and source-grounded and also comes from a reputable source, it's never a joke, it's a blunder, in all 10 languages I have some command of.
I rather may speculate that might be some kind of a "placeholder" name they forgot to correct before the publication.
I actually value BM website high and expected much from this their writeup. I don't know if I look like overreacting, if I do, that's a professional habit. I wouldn't want to be those guys if they worked under my editorial supervision, which they luckily don't :D
 
For what it's worth, blind tasters preferred these samples in these quantities on a split batch of IPA:

10 WLP001 Liquid
5 WLP001 Dry
1 US-05

All pitch rates calculated per manufacturer recommendations. It's one data point but I won't be buying or selling the dry yeast any time soon. I'm a fan of Omega OYL-004 at 200B cells for about $9.
 
For what it's worth, blind tasters preferred these samples in these quantities on a split batch of IPA:
The difference between US-05 and WLP001 is interesting. Not really a close race.

So, the implication is...the dry wlp001 is genetically inferior?
I have seen plenty of evidence that drying yeast does have some impact. That could be in play here. I am also not sure of the statistical significance of 10 vs 5 in a 11 person trail.
 
Actually, I wasn't asking you if I did.
I just said "I don't know if I...". A polite figure of speech, common for many languages of the world. Doesn't require a prompt answer 🤡

Now, let me humbly suggest to switch the focus of the thread back from the humble person of Protos to the yeast topic.
 
Back
Top