Austin Homebrew Supply Greenbelt v. WLP001 - The experiment begins...

[Hugh_Jass]

+1 for no dry hop.

The beer might not be as tasty, but it's a sacrifice in the name of science and for the betterment of mankind.

 

[bsdx]

Do a taste comparison before and after dry hopping

 

[Ichthy]

If you keg I definetely say no dry-hop. Carb then sample and note undry-hopped. Once your 'results' are in, just dry-hop in the keg.

 

[fastricky]

I too am interested in the results.

I really like the idea behind the yeast so I took the plunge and it's fermenting away right now (a hoppy pale ale).

I will say, there is nothing like FRESH yeast. Since this is a new strain I got it as soon as it was available. I have never seen a Wyeast Activator pack puff up so quickly - and the yeast took off like a rocket.

 

[bob1852]

I don't keg (yet) - so these will be bottled.

I'll take lots more input on whether or not to dry hop...

 

[NuclearRich]

I say no dry hop, as it will be masking the yeast produced flavors of [rimary fermentation.
Def. interested in results here, but also wondering how greenbelt would make smaller quantities of hops pop out of a recipe other than IPA style. Such as the citrus/fruit that could really stand out nicely in an american wheat or maybe a blonde ale.

In any case, good work.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

Just a thought, if you do dry-hop I would try to have the same level of clarity since the hop compounds love to 'stick' to yeast.

 

[mikeysab]

No dry hop

 

[strat_thru_marshall]

Both are actively fermenting this morning.

any difference in the way fermentation looks? One more vigorous than the other?

 

[IrregularPulse]

Since you already have my address, I suppose I'll test the results for you Maybe you'll be able to persuade me to shop AHS.

 

[AleJoe]

Curious to hear what you think of the comparison. My experience is that I recently bumped up the Lake Walk Pale Ale recipe to an IPA and used Greenbelt yeast.

I am not happy with the beer at all, getting that oniony flavor you sometimes get with Summit (used Simcoe/Amarillo)

Would like to hear more feedback but I think I'm sticking with my trusty 001

 

[bob1852]

any difference in the way fermentation looks? One more vigorous than the other?

Both have been eerily similar - as in same bubble pace going through the blow off tubes.

They're both settled down now after ~6 days....

Since you already have my address, I suppose I'll test the results for you Maybe you'll be able to persuade me to shop AHS.

 

[scottland]

I vote dry-hop. You should brew your beer as you normally would brew it. If this yeast highlights hoppy characteristics, I want to use it for an IPA, and IPAs are usually dry hopped. If there's no difference in a dry-hopped beer, I'd keep using 1056/001 which is much easier to get almost anywhere other than Austin, TX.

 

[cheesecake]

I say break it down into smaller 2.5 gallon batches. dry hop 2.5 gallons of each one and do a 4 beer comparison

 

[humann_brewing]

I don't think it's legal to not dry hop a APA or IPA

 

[bob1852]

I say break it down into smaller 2.5 gallon batches. dry hop 2.5 gallons of each one and do a 4 beer comparison

I thought about it, but have head space concerns, even just for a week...

I don't think it's legal to not dry hop a APA or IPA

Agreed. That'd be like judging a chili contest with beans

 

[smizak]

That'd be like judging a chili contest with beans

Dear God, shhhh................."they" might hear you.

 

[scottland]

I don't think it's legal to not dry hop a APA or IPA

I agree, which is exactly why this brew should be dry hopped. It's a yeast made specifically for hoppy beers. I read hoppy beers and think APA and IPA, and I'm not likely going to brew one and not dry hop it.

So DRY HOP!!

 

[steinsato]

I just ordered some of this yeast. I'm gonna go all out and do a Pliny recipe with it.

 

[WrongCoastBrewery]

Subscribed.....I too am interested in the Greenbelt strain. I have thought about creating an IPA with it.

 

[YeastFarmerBeemer]

I don't think it's legal to not dry hop a APA or IPA

I agree with this.

But in the interest of science i would have to vote for 4 batches - 2 dry hopped, 2 not dry hopped.

 

[strikertown]

Subscribed...I was thinking of doing a pliny clone with this strain, but ended up using WLP001

 

[bob1852]

I agree with this.

But in the interest of science i would have to vote for 4 batches - 2 dry hopped, 2 not dry hopped.

Too late for that - but maybe in the future I'll do a five gallon batch and split into five 1-gallon jugs: 001/dry, 001/nodry, greenbelt/dry, greenbelt/nodry, and a fifth gallon with 05 or something....

I dreamt last night that I tasted the hydro samples and could tell a huge difference

 

[Fletch78]

subscribed

 

[humann_brewing]

Too late for that - but maybe in the future I'll do a five gallon batch and split into five 1-gallon jugs: 001/dry, 001/nodry, greenbelt/dry, greenbelt/nodry, and a fifth gallon with 05 or something....

I dreamt last night that I tasted the hydro samples and could tell a huge difference

were the fermentors empty when you got up?

 

[bob1852]

So I dry hopped today....

Both batches finished at 1.012, which I think is good news to cut down on another possible variable that could lead to a different taste.

Color of both samples was identical (not that I would've expected any difference).

I dry hopped each with 0.5 oz Cascade and 0.5 oz Summit.

Prior to refrigerating the hydro samples I took multiple whifs. The greenbelt sample definitely had more aroma - not a huge difference, but noticeable.

I refrigerated each sample for a couple of hours and took a taste.

The WLP001 sample had more of an upfront bitterness; the Greenbelt sample had a smoother bitterness upfront, with more of a finish bitterness, but again in a smoother way than WLP001. No real noticeable difference in "flavor" other than the bitterness difference I described.

I'll bottle next Sunday, and then about a month later have a party with some blind testing

 

[fastricky]

Nice!

 

[Austin_]

The WLP001 sample had more of an upfront bitterness; the Greenbelt sample had a smoother bitterness upfront, with more of a finish bitterness, but again in a smoother way than WLP001. No real noticeable difference in "flavor" other than the bitterness difference I described.

Excellent. Thanks for the update. Tonight I pulled a sample of an India Brown Ale I made two weeks ago using Greenbelt. I've made this recipe with S-05 before and I too noticed a smoother bitterness with Greenbelt. Of course this is going off of memory. This yeast is much more flocculant than S-05, but that wasn't much of a surprise to me. So far I am pleased with this strain. Time will tell.

Look forward to your results.

 

[bob1852]

Excellent. Thanks for the update. Tonight I pulled a sample of an India Brown Ale I made two weeks ago using Greenbelt. I've made this recipe with S-05 before and I too noticed a smoother bitterness with Greenbelt. Of course this is going off of memory. This yeast is much more flocculant than S-05, but that wasn't much of a surprise to me. So far I am pleased with this strain. Time will tell.

Look forward to your results.

Thanks for that input - it helps to see more results!

fyi, also that I washed the greenbelt, and holy **** did I get a huge yield (way more than I've got from washing WLP001 or Wyeast1056).

 

[Austin_]

Thanks for that input - it helps to see more results!

fyi, also that I washed the greenbelt, and holy **** did I get a huge yield (way more than I've got from washing WLP001 or Wyeast1056).

Awesome. You better believe I'm washing some of this. I have many more recipes to try this yeast on.