Yeast and mouthfeel - Denny's Favorite 50

[bassballboy]

I've made a handful of batches of stouts over the years, and one thing I've never been able to nail down is a thick, creamy mouthfeel. I'm all grain, and have used 2# of flaked oats and a pound of flaked barley, mashing at 155*, a half pound of lactose, and result in a thin mouth feel.

I've been using US05 for yeast, but I'm wondering if this may be causing the issue. Reading the description for WY1450, that is exactly what I'm after. Specifically something like Bell's expedition's mouth feel. Will 1450 help bring the mouth feel thicker in comparison with US05?

 

[PeteNMA]

I'd suggest something more English themed. I have had great success with WLP002 in an oatmeal stout where fermenting the same recipe with US05 came out very thin

 

[ArkotRamathorn]

With all of that, the oats, the flaked barley, and the lactose and it still comes out as thin, leans towards infection to me but you don't mention any off flavors.

Did you take gravity readings for that batch and do you have them handy? Did you add any regular table sugar/candi syrup/honey to that batch? What did you bottle/keg the beer at in terms of carbonation?

Lots of simple sugars will thin a beer out really quick. On the same front high carbonation will make even a very thick beer feel very thin. If you used a whole packet of US05, in a relatively lower gravity beer you may have overpitched a tiny bit and the yeast attenuated really highly, so the gravity readings are very important. I do like the 1450, I used it for a fruit beer to try and make sure the beer didn't turn *too* dry and it worked pretty well.

 

[feinbera]

Ever try an even higher mash temperature? I just bottled a porter that only had half a pound flaked barley and 4 oz rolled oats, but where I screwed up my strike and spent the first 20 minutes of the mash around 157-159° before I finally got it down to my target of 155°. This was also fermented with US-05, and came out with a little more body than I was aiming for, was quite thick, approaching syrupy in mouthfeel, though with a dry enough taste that I'm at least somewhat confident it's not horribly underattenuated.

I'm also curious, what were your gravity numbers? And, when was the last time you calibrated your thermometer? Mashing cooler than you thought you were due to bad thermometer calibration could be another way to get thinner-than-expected beer.

 

[schematix]

Nitro

 

[Brauer]

What level are you carbing at? Too much carbination will make your beer very thin.

 

[bassballboy]

OG: 1.095
FG: 1.023

No sugars added besides lactose. Highly unlikely there are infections, no off flavors months after bottling and I'm thorough with starsan. Carbonation wise I aimed low as its bottle conditioned and anted it to last a long time, roughly 3oz priming sugar into 4.5 gallons at bottling.

 

[Brauer]

I have to disagree. 1.7vol of co2 would would be on the low end. 4.5gal would only need 2 oz of sugar. Your at 3 oz which would put you around 2.1 vol of co2 which is the high end for a stout.

 

[bassballboy]

I have to disagree. 1.7vol of co2 would would be on the low end. 4.5gal would only need 2 oz of sugar. Your at 3 oz which would put you around 2.1 vol of co2 which is the high end for a stout.

Perhaps, but I can tell you it isn't overly carved... If anything a tad flat. In any case it isn't causing the beer to be thin, if anything the opposite.

 

[ArkotRamathorn]

Well, it may be that you are less sensitive to mouthfeel or something. Not that trying new yeasts and such isn't a good plan. At 1.023 I can't imagine it being thin unless the carbonation was huge, I don't intend for it to sound like there's something wrong with you but your mouth may just not be as sensitive to thick/thinness of a liquid (I had to do a 1.108 wee heavy that stopped at 1.030 before I thought "yeah, that's thick").

1450 or pther dusty low attenuation yeasts might help.

 

[bassballboy]

Hah, that might be right. I'm comparing directly to bourbon county brand stout and bells expedition which are both very thick, those are what I'm aiming for . Maybe I'll do a test batch and call it a day.

 

[Chadwick]

I don't know how on-topic this is or isn't, but I've noticed very different yeast behaviors when doing starters lately. I suspect that these differences may have a difference in perceived mouth-feel.

For instance, when I do a starter using something like WLP001 or US-05 it seems to be thin and never really produce much of a krausen. English yeasts tend to produce thicker krausens and more of a head, especially when agitated.

I've spent the last 2 weeks growing starters of WLP090 (San Diego Super Yeast) and I'm super impressed with the heads these things form when agitated. The krausen isn't much, but if you give it a whirl or two the head gets crazy big.

I've been told that WLP090 really is good for being clean while highlighting the malt flavors. I'm going to brew my first beer using this yeast this weekend. I suppose that I could give some feedback after the fact.

All in all, the point is that yeast strains can have an impact on things like head retention, an possibly mouth-feel and more. US-05 is a good yeast, even one of my favorites, but it is rather bland about producing beers with big heads, rich mouth-feel, and more. What it does excel at is being forgiving, attenuating well, and having a very neutral flavor profile.