Cellarscience Baja Experiences

[Wuggly Ump]

To add to my post above about my Mexican lager that I brewed with this yeast, FWIW: the feedback I got at my homebrew club was really good, so I sent it to a c. 375 entry comp and it took bronze in the international pale lager category, scoring 44. No comments in either venue indicated any bad fermentation byproducts.
So my experience, at least, indicates that Baja can get the job done!

 

[PizzaPapa]

I've got a batch of my stand-by mexican lager going with Baja. So far, it's honestly not bad. No real big esters or phenols, just kind of a yeasty taste. This is before lagering, so I'm sure that'll go away fast.

 

[lumbergh]

I'm reusing Baja for the 1st time. I probably underpitched as I put the starter on the stir plate right before I started brewing. Lots more lag time than when I pitched from the packet. I'll know how it is in a month or so.

 

[PizzaPapa]

Small update: So my mexican-style lager is currently in a keg, lagering. It's checking pretty much every single box it should, other than being slightly sulfury. I did pressure ferment (about 5psi) so there's a chance that just trapped sulfur in as I've had even WLP940 do before. But no esters, phenols or any other real off-flavors really picked up besides sulfur and a sort of "yeasty" taste, but it's still young.

That said personally I'm not super blown away by this yeast. WLP940/Que Bueno/ect is one of my personal favorite lager strains as a whole and a dry version has pretty much been my dream yeast. Baja does give off some of the flavor profile and drinkability of the liquid versions, but as a whole seems to work way way slower. I've always loved that other versions have resulted in beers so clear I can read a newspaper right through the fermenter, but this one is still a bit hazy. Again, still very young and there could be parts that could be from my process. It could be a cell count thing, since I'm used to the higher count that Fermentis supposedly has on most of their yeasts and that CellarScience specifically recommends rehydrating (which I did not do).

In general, my opinion is kind of mixed on this yeast. Probably going to stick to the liquid version, but it's not really ready yet so I could change my mind.

 

[SanPancho]

Yep I'm thinking dry pitching may be the culprit for the lag time. Regardless I think it'll turn out just fine as long as the sanitation practices were good. I'll make sure to keep everyone posted!

1 pack for 3gal wort at 50F. never took off, even though i rehydrated it in goferm evo protect. on 2nd night aftewards, threw in second pack of yeast, right into fermenter. waited more than 24 hours again to see anything, might have been closer to 48.
WTF.
regardless of how beer comes out, i wont be using it again. i hate having to keep a ton of strains on hand in fridge, remembering to feed/grow them every few months, but i'll do 940 from now on.

 

[ntempleton]

I ended up dumping the batch as it was very phenolic. I never have these issues with liquid strains. I think it's the pitching rate honestly. Regardless chalk this up to a dry strain I won't bother with again

I had the exact same experience, with the extra bonus of it also being very acidic. Like you, I also under-pitched. Glad to see that others are having better results.

 

[rtstrider]

I had the exact same experience, with the extra bonus of it also being very acidic. Like you, I also under-pitched. Glad to see that others are having better results.

I pitched 2 packs and had that experience. I don't believe that would've been considered an under pitch for a 5 gallon batch. From my understanding that would not be considered an underpitch

 

[lumbergh]

When I transferred to keg the sample I tasted didn't have any noticable off flavors. I'll taste a carbonated sample sometime in the next few days.

 

[lumbergh]

Carbonated sample tastes fine. This was used for a Negra Modelo clone (the same recipe as when I pitched from the dry yeast packet).

 

[PizzaPapa]

Update: yesterday I decided to cook up some beer brats for labor day and my go-to cooking beer is Modelo. Figured that now that it's lagered for just shy of a month, I might as well do a side by side comparison. Sadly I didn't take any pictures but here's what I noticed:

• Baja-fermented beer was not nearly as clean as the commercial example. Not necessarily in a bad way with off flavors, but it lacked the macro-style clean flavor. Also wasn't as sweet as Modelo.
• Flavor was a bit more spicy, but in a noble hop way. This most likely comes from the hallertau I used both for bittering and later on in the boil coming through, but the off-flavors everyone keeps mentioning make me wonder if it's being accentuated by the yeast.
• Flavor was a bit more complex overall, but less "beer flavored beer". If anything, it reminded me a little more of German-style lagers.

Overall it's not a bad beer (in fact, my girlfriend LOVES it), just not coming across in a way that screams "yeah this is Modelo... but BETTER" like previous iterations of the recipe has. This all could be user error, but yeah I'm not really blown away by Baja. Maybe I'll try it again down the road but for the time being I'll stick to WLP940/Que Bueno.

 

[lumbergh]

To add to my post above about my Mexican lager that I brewed with this yeast, FWIW: the feedback I got at my homebrew club was really good, so I sent it to a c. 375 entry comp and it took bronze in the international pale lager category, scoring 44. No comments in either venue indicated any bad fermentation byproducts.
So my experience, at least, indicates that Baja can get the job done!

Recipe?

 

[Wuggly Ump]

Recipe?

Sorry for not responding sooner. Here it is, for a 5.5ish gallon batch:
4.5 lb pils
2.75 lb Vienna
1.5 lb flaked corn
5 oz CaraHell
Mashed 144 for 40, then 156 for 25
Mash out at 168
1 oz Mt. Hood at 60 min
1 oz Tettnanger at 10

 

[Jag75]

I hope this yeast works out for me . After reading this thread I'm a tad concerned. I have 3bbl with 25 or 26 packs of Baja right now . Today has been a week in the FV. The gravity was 1.033 as of yesterday.

It took just about 24 hrs to get some action. Fermenting at 48f , as per the recommended temp of 48-50 on the package. Just waiting on it to hit 19-21 to start raising the temp. We normally use Que Bueno , but we wanted to try something else as the price difference is significant. We will see here soon if it was a good move or not.

 

[rtstrider]

I hope this yeast works out for me . After reading this thread I'm a tad concerned. I have 3bbl with 25 or 26 packs of Baja right now . Today has been a week in the FV. The gravity was 1.033 as of yesterday.

It took just about 24 hrs to get some action. Fermenting at 48f , as per the recommended temp of 48-50 on the package. Just waiting on it to hit 19-21 to start raising the temp. We normally use Que Bueno , but we wanted to try something else as the price difference is significant. We will see here soon if it was a good move or not.

I'd be willing to bet if that was pitched in a liquid state (aka yeast starter) on the homebrew level that would probably make a pretty significant difference in lag time. At least it did with the Lallemand Koln yeast. Hopefully your experiences are much more successful!

 

[fluketamer]

its a very clean yeast almost too clean it seems like it doesnt add anything to the beer. the same bills with 34/70 had more flavor.

 

[SanPancho]

I hope this yeast works out for me . After reading this thread I'm a tad concerned. I have 3bbl with 25 or 26 packs of Baja right now . Today has been a week in the FV. The gravity was 1.033 as of yesterday.

It took just about 24 hrs to get some action. Fermenting at 48f , as per the recommended temp of 48-50 on the package. Just waiting on it to hit 19-21 to start raising the temp. We normally use Que Bueno , but we wanted to try something else as the price difference is significant. We will see here soon if it was a good move or not.

please tell me you have a wholesale account. 500g pack is only 90 bucks, you could have done two pitches with one brick

 

[Jag75]

please tell me you have a wholesale account. 500g pack is only 90 bucks, you could have done two pitches with one brick

All we could find was the 12oz packets. Every place was sold out . We actually bought them from a shop in Oregon. If we like the yeast , we will definitely buy bricks.

 

[beersk]

I hope this yeast works out for me . After reading this thread I'm a tad concerned. I have 3bbl with 25 or 26 packs of Baja right now . Today has been a week in the FV. The gravity was 1.033 as of yesterday.

It took just about 24 hrs to get some action. Fermenting at 48f , as per the recommended temp of 48-50 on the package. Just waiting on it to hit 19-21 to start raising the temp. We normally use Que Bueno , but we wanted to try something else as the price difference is significant. We will see here soon if it was a good move or not.

I'd start raising it now. That's higher than I'd like after a week of fermentation. Get it up to 60F at least for now.

 

[Bramling Cross]

I bought a pair of sachets the week they first became available. Watching this thread, and very much aware that the first pitch of a dry yeast typically sucks, has cooled my jets. Those sachets have stayed in my fridge because of the pitch big and ferment warm thing. Why gamble a 6-gal batch when you've got plenty of 34/70, S-189, and Diamond in the fridge that you know will ultimately make 30gals+ of lager through subsequent pitches, right?

Given the constant refrain that this yeast needs to work at 55F, what do you guys think about using it as a steam beer (sorry, Anchor, you and your lawyers are dead...RIP) yeast or cream ale yeast?

 

[Jag75]

The beer is done and in the Brite tank . It's been in the tank for a few days . Going back to Que Bueno . The Baja lagged and seemed like it had to fight its way through fermentation. Had a slight acetylaldehyde to it . Warmed it up a tad and let it go about 4 more days . Then crashed and transferred to the BT. Acetylaldehyde is gone , but I just think the Que Bueno is better. It doesn't lag , floccs better .

 

[rtstrider]

I bought a pair of sachets the week they first became available. Watching this thread, and very much aware that the first pitch of a dry yeast typically sucks, has cooled my jets. Those sachets have stayed in my fridge because of the pitch big and ferment warm thing. Why gamble a 6-gal batch when you've got plenty of 34/70, S-189, and Diamond in the fridge that you know will ultimately make 30gals+ of lager through subsequent pitches, right?

Given the constant refrain that this yeast needs to work at 55F, what do you guys think about using it as a steam beer (sorry, Anchor, you and your lawyers are dead...RIP) yeast or cream ale yeast?

Why not try pitching 1 sachet of Baja into a 2L 1.040 starter, let that ferment out, cold crash, decant, then pitch into the wort? I'd bet it would take off fine after that. I know it defeats the purpose of dry yeast mostly, but, for those (like myself) in areas where liquid yeast shipping is limited throughout the year it could be a potential viable solution.

 

[Bramling Cross]

Well, those two sachets of Baja rotting away in my fridge got the best of me. With full kegs and no pressure for an experimental batch to come through, I decided to pitch them just to see how bad this lag issue really is.

Below are two curves from identical worts (9lbs of pils, 1lb of light Munich) brewed a few weeks apart. The first curve is two sachets of Baja held at between 48F and 50F per the manufacturer's instructions. The second curve is a pitch of two sachets of 34/70 that I pitched five days ago.

Honestly, this isn't a fair comparison. I know 34/70 like the back of my hand and I employed the modern fast lager ferment method with the 34/70 pitch. Nevertheless, Baja's dismal performance is evident during its silly lag period and unwillingness to push the fermentation forward once it did gain its footing.

I dumped the Baja cake and started the 34/70 pitch instead. There's no shortage of excellent dry lager strains. Baja isn't one of them. I see no point in buying it again.

Baja

34/70*

* With the 34/70 fermentation now in its crash phase, I've edited the post by removing the incomplete original 34/70 curve and I've replaced it with a full curve that represents TG and the crash. You can still see the original five day curve as as an attachment.

 

[beersk]

Boy, that is a shame. But you can't go wrong with 34/70. Just an all around great and versatile yeast.

 

[rtstrider]

Well, those two sachets of Baja rotting away in my fridge got the best of me. With full kegs and no pressure for an experimental batch to come through, I decided to pitch them just to see how bad this lag issue really is.

Below are two curves from identical worts (9lbs of pils, 1lb of light Munich) brewed a few weeks apart. The first curve is two sachets of Baja held at between 48F and 50F per the manufacturer's instructions. The second curve is a pitch of two sachets of 34/70 that I pitched five days ago.

Honestly, this isn't a fair comparison. I know 34/70 like the back of my hand and I employed the modern fast lager ferment method with the 34/70 pitch. Nevertheless, Baja's dismal performance is evident during its silly lag period and unwillingness to push the fermentation forward once it did gain its footing.

I dumped the Baja cake and started the 34/70 pitch instead. There's no shortage of excellent dry lager strains. Baja isn't one of them. I see no point in buying it again.

Baja
View attachment 855382

34/70
View attachment 855383

It's a shame because I'd like to see more dry yeast lager strain availability. White Labs did just release wlp860 dry. Grabbing a pack of that and propping it up in a 2L 1.040 starter is on my to do list. I'd be curious to see how the dry variant compares with Omega Bayern/Imperial Harvest/Wyeast Munich 2