Are you an ex-Windsor yeast user who has switched to SafeAle S-04 (or visa-versa)?

BrewSwag 728
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.
Silver_Is_Money

Silver_Is_Money

Larry Sayre, Developer of 'Mash Made Easy'
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
6,452
Reaction score
2,209
Location
N/E Ohio
Are you an ex Danstar Windsor dry yeast user who has switched to SafeAle S-04 dry yeast for specifically UK style ales, or visa-versa, and if so, why?
 
GilaMinumBeer said:
Is there something in particular about dry yeast causing you so much examination on the matter?
Click to expand...

I'm retired and potentially old enough to be your grandfather. I was an avid home brewer until about 20 years ago when job and family commitments led me away from it. Back then I used almost exclusively liquid yeast, but now that I'm retired and getting back to brewing again, I'm trying to simplify things in my remaining life. I've heard that dry yeasts have come a long way since 20+ years ago, and I'm trying to get an education as to which are worthy of my efforts. Is there something in particular that you find personally offensive in any of this?

BTW, Windsor and Nottingham existed 20+ years ago, but I only heard of Fermentis yeasts recently, upon my return to brewing, I'm trying to determine if they have qualities that make them superior to the old Danstar products. I would also like to know if the old Danstar yeasts have undergone improvements.
 
Best bet would be pick a recipe your going to brew and then ask "what dry yeast would you recommend" probably get you further....Dry yeast work great and S04 is my go to English/Irish style yeast...will be pitching some tomorrow in my Irish red I made today
 
TasunkaWitko said:
SIM - this discussion might provide some information:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=619008

I've used Nottingham and S04 - like them both, but am not cognizant of the nuances and subtleties between the two. I have not used Windsor, but the consensus seems to be that it is an under-performer. I cannot vouch for that.

Good luck!
Click to expand...

Thank you kindly! Our quests appear quite similar. You provided some great links. BRY-97 is a yeast I had not heard of, and it seems like it may be a real winner. A potential US-05 killer?
 
I use both, I have not switched to or from either. I like both of them. I have not used them in a similar recipe close enough together to determine what the differences are. I did have one Windsor that took warming and swirling to get it to finish. It took about 3 weeks.
 
I'm not a fan of Windsor. It works, but needs to be babysitted a bit too much for my liking. I'm sure others absolutely love it, but there's better options to suit my needs/style imo.

I'm a huge fan of 04. It gets in there and gets the job done quickly, and flocs incredibly. I also enjoy the subtle taste it gives. I mainly use it in IPA's, but have had fantastic results in stouts, porters, and kettle sours as well. To me, it's a fantastic strain and I always have some on hand.

As with any strain, temp control plays a big part in the final product... so I do not include that with my evaluations of yeasts.
 
JONNYROTTEN said:
Best bet would be pick a recipe your going to brew and then ask "what dry yeast would you recommend" probably get you further....Dry yeast work great and S04 is my go to English/Irish style yeast...will be pitching some tomorrow in my Irish red I made today
Click to expand...

Try 04 in a fruity/citrusy IPA. You will not be disappointed. I've pushed it over 10% abv with no issues too. 04 is a hungry beast!

:mug:
 
I used to use Windsor exclusively for my pale ale. I've since switched to us05 to pick up more of the hop aroma and taste.

I'm with the k!ng above, Windsor just takes too much effort to avoid off flavor from diecetyl.
 
I don't consider Windsor and S04 adequate subs for each other.

Windsor is notably underattenuative, leaving lots more residual sugar and body behind. S04, while wonderful at under 64 degrees or so, is more attenuative and clears the beer well. At warmer temperatures, it gets weirdly estery, not pleasantly estery, sort of like nottingham.

I think nottingham and S04 are better considered subs for each other, and Windsor is its own category.
 
k1ngl1ves said:
Try 04 in a fruity/citrusy IPA. You will not be disappointed. I've pushed it over 10% abv with no issues too. 04 is a hungry beast!

:mug:
Click to expand...
I used 04 in a modified zombie dust clone. One of my favorite IPA's I've made... That's where the yeast I'm pitching tomorrow. The mason jar smells awesome. I'm hoping some of it transfers to my Irish red
 
k1ngl1ves said:
I'm not a fan of Windsor. It works, but needs to be babysitted a bit too much for my liking. I'm sure others absolutely love it, but there's better options to suit my needs/style imo.

I'm a huge fan of 04. It gets in there and gets the job done quickly, and flocs incredibly. I also enjoy the subtle taste it gives. I mainly use it in IPA's, but have had fantastic results in stouts, porters, and kettle sours as well. To me, it's a fantastic strain and I always have some on hand.

As with any strain, temp control plays a big part in the final product... so I do not include that with my evaluations of yeasts.
Click to expand...

Great info here! Is the babysitting you referenced in regard to Windsor related to its tendency to ferment quickly and need a blow-off arrangement, or to its finicky temperature range and potential for off flavors, or both?
 
Yooper said:
I don't consider Windsor and S04 adequate subs for each other.

Windsor is notably underattenuative, leaving lots more residual sugar and body behind. S04, while wonderful at under 64 degrees or so, is more attenuative and clears the beer well. At warmer temperatures, it gets weirdly estery, not pleasantly estery, sort of like nottingham.

I think nottingham and S04 are better considered subs for each other, and Windsor is its own category.
Click to expand...

Thanks much! From this and several other posts, it sounds like S-04 is clearly the way to go for UK ale styles!!!
 
I think:

S-04 = Wyeast 1098 = WLP007

Windsor = Wyeast 1099 (and no WLP equivalent)

If I am right, then both come from Whitbread, but 1099 is known as "the dry strain" and 1098 is known as "the other strain". Attenuation of the first one is around 75% or higher, while in my experience the Windsor is all done at about 62% on average. However the finished beer does NOT taste thick or sweet or underattenuated. I think it is a masterful way to generate a "session" style beer for those interested -- you'll get the same mouthfeel but lower alcohol for easier drinkability.

So I use both.

http://www.mrmalty.com/yeast.htm

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=600356&page=2
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
Great info here! Is the babysitting you referenced in regard to Windsor related to its tendency to ferment quickly and need a blow-off arrangement, or to its finicky temperature range and potential for off flavors, or both?
Click to expand...

It's more like the 6 year old kid that doesn't want to clean his room. You have to keep pushing him along to clean up, but he'll usually never really finish. Lol!

Silver_Is_Money said:
Thanks much! From this and several other posts, it sounds like S-04 is clearly the way to go for UK ale styles!!!
Click to expand...

Not just UK. It's great in multiple varieties and styles.

:mug:
 
Bry-97 = Ballantine Ale.
US-05 = BRY-96 Ballantine Beer (a.k.a. "Chico," Wyeast 1056, White Labs WLP001)
S-04 = Whitbread "B" (a.k.a. Wyeast 1098, White Labs WLP007)
W34/70 = W34/70 (a.k.a. Wyeast 2124, White Labs WLP830)
WB06 = W68 (Wyeast 3068, White Labs WLP300)
S-189 = Samiclaus (a.k.a. White Labs WLP885) Hürlimann brewery in Switzerland
 
I use both. They are each their own beasts, but I haven't had problems with either, not like you all describe.

Windsor
I use this on my malt forward beers. I make some Double Pale Ales, Amber Ales, and some Porters and Stouts. I use this on beers I want to have a bigger body on. These are beers that I might otherwise be tempted to use a little Lactose in.

It definitely takes time, but four weeks in Primary and a cold crash seem to work well. It takes longer to clear, but I've never had a stuck ferment or diaceytl. The ester profile can be a little generically fruity, but I love how these beers turn out. I use this yeast the same way I do Wyeast London Ale III, which I like a little more.

S-04
I use this on any beer I want to have more of a clean, crisp, clear, hop forward profile. It's more ideal on a traditional bitter or English style IPA.

Of topic, but the yeast I'm really excited about is the London ESB dry yeast, I'm fermenting out an Imperial Porter right now, and I've got high hopes that this might be my new favorite English yeast.
 
TasunkaWitko said:
I have not used Windsor, but the consensus seems to be that it is an under-performer.
Click to expand...

Windsor is certainly not an under-performer. It is an under-attenuator. As long as you know this factor and use it to properly plan your fermentables and their mashing schedule, the beer made with that yeast is fine.

As Dave already mentioned, even when the resulting FG was higher than desired, the beer that I made with Windsor was still pleasant and very drinkable.

I also agree that there is little comparison between S-04 and Windsor yeast. They are not substitutes for each other.
 
I just made a porter with Windsor last month. It tasted dry enough that I actually added a few ounces of lactose to bring the body up even more to my liking -- not milkshake thick, but just barely enough to help balance the roast.
 
Which dry yeast would each of you choose for a Fullers ESB clone ale?

Also, there seems to be another (relatively) new player on the dry yeast scene. Mangrove Jack's.
 
I have heard people complain about under attenuation most recently with S-33 and Windsor.

Two things I've done besides mashing lower;

1) Checked the pitching requirement and over pitch. FWIW - A yeast thats 6 month old, with a beer at 1.059 needs 1.2 packs, at a year it needs 1.4 packs.

2) Add sugar to knock it down or dry it out more.

BTW - Over doing the crystal malt is not good either. Stan Hieronymus "Brewing Like A Monk" warns that too much crystal hurts attenuation. I think it needs to be under 20% maybe less. Carapils counts as crystal....

Both ferment fast also like S-04, but i think they need the full fermentation cycle to get that last 10-12%. I typically primary at least 3 weeks.

I recently made an ESB using Windsor and added a pound of demerara.

I got a nice tasting 1.059 OG ESB with Windsor at 1.014 FG. ~ 75% attenuation with a touch of roasty, biscuity, caramel, flavor with a bit of plum and raisin. The demerara has a nice taste to it raw and I detect it slightly in the finish on this beer. Has a slight caramel taste.


King Edward the 8th - Extra Special Bitter
 
I've seen S-04 linked to WLP007. And WLP002 is supposedly of the same general flavor profile as WLP007, albeit with 10% less attenuation. The 10% lower attenuation factor is how/why I have tentatively linked Windsor and WLP002 together (right or wrong).

The more I study this, the better S-04 is starting to look.
 
I just figured this out. If you get Zymurgy magazine, take a look at issue March/April 2017. Right there on page 18, Fuller's themselves are endorsing Danstar/Lallemand London ESB yeast. So if you're looking for WLP002/1968, then look no further than the new London/ESB yeast from Lallemand.

Cheers.
 
dmtaylor said:
I just figured this out. If you get Zymurgy magazine, take a look at issue March/April 2017. Right there on page 18, Fuller's themselves are endorsing Danstar/Lallemand London ESB yeast. So if you're looking for WLP002/1968, then look no further than the new London/ESB yeast from Lallemand.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Great find! London ESB and Windsor seem to presently be occupying the same nitch. I wonder how close Windsor and London ESB are in characteristics and flavor profile, and if Danstar will be phasing out Windsor at some juncture? It almost seems as if Windsors days are numbered. Danstar is being forced to raise the bar in order to remain competitive with Fermentis and Mangrove Jacks, both of which appear to me to have moved well beyond the formerly stagnating Lallemand with regard to dry beer yeasts.
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
Great find! London ESB and Windsor seem to presently be occupying the same nitch. I wonder how close Windsor and London ESB are in characteristics and flavor profile, and if Danstar will be phasing out Windsor at some juncture? It almost seems as if Windsors days are numbered. Danstar is being forced to raise the bar in order to remain competitive with Fermentis and Mangrove Jacks, both of which appear to me to have moved well beyond the formerly stagnating Lallemand with regard to dry beer yeasts.
Click to expand...

I think Windsor actually has good uses, in particular for making any session strength ales. It attenuates poorly at about 62%, but it does NOT taste overly thick or sweet either when it's done. If my assumptions are correct, then the new London ESB yeast will attenuate closer to about 70%, which is more in line with what American brewers might prefer to make "normal" strength beers. And then there's Nottingham which is closer to about 78% attenuation for drier or higher gravity beers. So, each one serves a purpose, and I will definitely use all three.
 
dmtaylor said:
I just figured this out. If you get Zymurgy magazine, take a look at issue March/April 2017. Right there on page 18, Fuller's themselves are endorsing Danstar/Lallemand London ESB yeast. So if you're looking for WLP002/1968, then look no further than the new London/ESB yeast from Lallemand.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

It's not the Fuller's strain (this has been confirmed by both Lallemand and Fuller's). From my understanding (never used windsor) it's like cleaner version of windsor. Otherwise they seem similar (attenuation and flocculation). There's a long thread about the london ESB here.
 
I waded through all 17 pages of the London ESB yeast thread, and learned there that Danstar's relatively new 'London ESB' yeast has been confirmed by Lallemand to be 100% identical to their old 'London Ale' yeast. I'm not sure what that means...

It sounds like it has terrible attenuation (low 60's), and does not floculate out of solution well, but can make decently tasty UK style beer. A few comments there about S-04 being too dry and clean for ESB, and London ESB being more suitable from a flavor (ester contribution) perspective. One comment about Nottingham being way too dry and clean for UK ales.

I did not clearly catch any comments from anyone with regard to doing a split fermentation using London ESB and Windsor to see if there is any perceived difference in flavor. Both of these seem to attenuate and flock about the same.
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
I waded through all 17 pages of the London ESB yeast thread, and learned there that Danstar's relatively new 'London ESB' yeast has been confirmed by Lallemand to be 100% identical to their old 'London Ale' yeast. I'm not sure what that means...

It sounds like it has terrible attenuation (low 60's), and does not floculate out of solution well, but can make decently tasty UK style beer. A few comments there about S-04 being too dry and clean for ESB, and London ESB being more suitable from a flavor (ester contribution) perspective. One comment about Nottingham being way too dry and clean for UK ales.

I did not clearly catch any comments from anyone with regard to doing a split fermentation using London ESB and Windsor to see if there is any perceived difference in flavor. Both of these seem to attenuate and flock about the same.
Click to expand...

A split batch would be interesting, these strains seem so similar. Attenuation can be increased by either using crystal only in small amounts or by including sugar in the grain bill. Mash temp has to be low of course. My batch dropped clear after two weeks in the bottles even without cold crashing, so the low flocculation was not a problem.

S-04 seems to be quite a polarized yeast. I've made OK batches with it but I should get to test the different dry and liquid english varieties to really see if i like it or not. This London ESB seemed to be more clean tasting but maybe not in a bad way.

If you're interested in brewing English styles, I'd suggest to take a look at Jimsbeerkit forum. There's lots of info about these different English strains there.
 
Many years ago Danstar sold a dry ale yeast called "Manchester". Does anyone know when this one vanished, and what its flavor and other characteristics were like? If London Ale was ressurected as London ESB, perhaps Danstar will resurrect Manchester yeast someday.

UPDATE: I found this about Manchester yeast. Seems it vanished in roughly the year 2000 (give or take) along with London Ale.

Manchester Ale (Saccharomyces Cerevisiae)
This strain shows sensory contribution in the tradition of an old English style beer. It produces a very complex, woody and full-bodied ale when fermented at warm temperatures. Medium attenuation similar to the London. Recommended 17 to 21C (64 to 70F) fermentation temperature range.
 
Last edited:
I've used Windsor with good results in a Sweet Stout, where I wanted relatively low attenuation. I believe US-04 attenuates more fully than Windsor.
 
I made a Caribou Slobber last fall that I loved with Windsor. I just made it again recently with WLP-013. I got that idea from the yeast substitution chart that was posted by bama (I believe). I fermented it this time in a dorm fridge with a temp controller. I didn't have it last year when I used the dry yeast. The beer doesn't have the same estery quality that I loved about it last year. I am wondering if I made a mistake by using the White Labs or if the mistake was cooler fermentation. I fermented around 66 for 5 days then let it sit out in my basement which tends to stay cooler than the upstairs by a couple degrees. I keep the stat around 69 so it may have fluctuated between 66 and 69 for another 4 days. I then racked it to secondary and crashed it down to the low 40's maybe high 30's to try to get the yeast to drop, which it did pretty well. It turned out fairly clear so far but its only a couple/three weeks old. I am impatient and tend to drink my beers pretty early and I am hoping maybe some of the qualities I loved about my first batch will age into the beer. I do remember the last pint of my first attempt was the best one out of the keg. Sorry I am kinda rambling but thought I would comment since I was on the thread researching the Windsor strain. Does anyone disagree that WLP013 is a bad substitution for Windsor?
 
brewbama said:
WB06 = W68 (Wyeast 3068, White Labs WLP300)
Click to expand...

Apologies for reviving a zombie thread, but I don't think this information is correct, and I didn't want anyone to happen upon this thread and be misinformed.
 
ebbelwoi said:
Apologies for reviving a zombie thread, but I don't think this information is correct, and I didn't want anyone to happen upon this thread and be misinformed.
Click to expand...

Well, this is an old thread, so it should be expected that the info is outdated, especially since there were genomic studies conducted of various yeast strains between then and now. For what it's worth, here would be my edits of that old post:

Bry-97 = Ballantine Ale = no equivalents besides Mangrove Jack M44 West Coast which is just BRY-97 repackaged
US-05 = related but NOT the same as BRY-96 Ballantine Beer (a.k.a. "Chico," Wyeast 1056, WLP001), higher ~83% attenuation
S-04 = WLP006 Bedford, which is NOT the same as Whitbread "B" (which might be either Wyeast 1098 or WLP007 but NOT both)
W34/70 = W34/70 (a.k.a. Wyeast 2124, White Labs WLP830)
WB-06 = WLP570 & Wyeast 1388 Belgian Golden Strong, and NOT at all related to German W68 (Wyeast 3068, White Labs WLP300)
S-189 = Samiclaus (a.k.a. White Labs WLP885) Hurlimann brewery in Switzerland

And Windsor... might not have any exact equivalents. Closest might be Fermentis S-33, or also Danstar-Lallemand's other London ESB dried strain which is very similar, and Mangrove M15 Empire which just repacks one of those other three. And Munton's old yeast is also similar but not quite the same.

For greater details on approximate equivalents for these and for every other dried yeast on the market based in part on genomic studies and thousands of hours of deep thought, see here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ETgOwH5BWx3bTqEt0kEpV-O5OM/edit#gid=243238826
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Kristoffer84
S04 (and others) When is it overpitch with negative consequences?
Replies
12
Views
2K
hotbeer
hotbeer
DJL531
S-04 my new go to Pale Ale yeast
Replies
36
Views
5K
wepeeler
wepeeler
Chalkyt
An update on "Failed Carbonation. Why is it so?"
Replies
3
Views
1K
Chalkyt
Chalkyt
C
Can/should you adjust the gravity after fermentation?
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
Christoff
C
MightyMosin
My yeast notes
Replies
3
Views
2K
MightyMosin
MightyMosin
InkBird 300

Latest posts

Back
Top