Does anyone else dislike US-05?

[MaxStout]

Formula for a long well responded to thread:
1. Take a well used widely accepted part of the process.
2. Say that you don’t like it, not because it is bad, but because your more sophisticated palate detects something that others don’t.
3. Wait for scads of bandwagoneers to agree with you to show how sophisticated they also are.

Confirmation bias.

Someone upthread erroneously associated sweet fruity flavor with diacetyl. Funny. US-05 can generate some fruitiness, especially at low ferm temps, but that is not diacetyl.

 

[Smellyglove]

Formula for a long well responded to thread:
1. Take a well used widely accepted part of the process.
2. Say that you don’t like it, not because it is bad, but because your more sophisticated palate detects something that others don’t.
3. Wait for scads of bandwagoneers to agree with you to show how sophisticated they also are.

What did you mean by this?

 

[AZCoolerBrewer]

Mostly I mean that I think the traffic on this thread is misleading and that I love US-05.

 

[Eucrid]

The one with M44 is more bitter, more hoppy, and "cleaner" in character. The S05 batch is more citrusy, less firmly bitter, and "softer" if that makes sense.

Thats interesting. From my non side by side impressions I've thought M44 to be extremely clean but also slightly muting of hop flavour compared to 05. Now thats not side by side and in different beers so I am probably wrong. Really surprised by the bitterness thing though. I definitely need to run some side by sides this year. I want to experiment with Bry97 too.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

White Labs have sequenced the genomes of WLP001 and 1056 and they are different, albeit related. That seems to be backed up by brewing experiments. I imagine one took yeast from Sierra Nevada and one went back to the original BRY-96 at Siebel, or something like that.

Sierra Nevada took BRY-96 and have maintained in in-house where it has evolved to the point where they regard it as something different to BRY-96. It looks like US-05 has also evolved away from BRY-96, Chris Giles of Surebrew claims to have found 5 different strains within it. I imagine they're mostly flocculation mutants like Gilliland found in Guinness, but it's worth noting that dry strains are definitely not single strains in many cases - Nottingham is another example where Giles has found that 70% of the mix is a "lager" strain.

 

[Smellyglove]

White Labs have sequenced the genomes of WLP001 and 1056 and they are different, albeit related. That seems to be backed up by brewing experiments. I imagine one took yeast from Sierra Nevada and one went back to the original BRY-96 at Siebel, or something like that.

Sierra Nevada took BRY-96 and have maintained in in-house where it has evolved to the point where they regard it as something different to BRY-96. It looks like US-05 has also evolved away from BRY-96, Chris Giles of Surebrew claims to have found 5 different strains within it. I imagine they're mostly flocculation mutants like Gilliland found in Guinness, but it's worth noting that dry strains are definitely not single strains in many cases - Nottingham is another example where Giles has found that 70% of the mix is a "lager" strain.

Do you know where I can find the key to what the "BExxx" and such means in that wheel?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Do you know where I can find the key to what the "BExxx" and such means in that wheel?

They're keeping that a secret. However, Suregork & co have informed guesses on the White Labs strains at least (roughly BE044-87) :
http://beer.suregork.com/?p=3919

 

[Azura]

s-05 gives me peach/citrus around 60F. Clean at 66F. Increasing the temp to 72F on day 5 for two days then down to 56F for three days then kegging produces a reliably clear beer after cold conditioning and slow carbonating in the keg for 2 weeks.

One thing I don't like about it is it makes me feel more drunk than I should be compared to many other yeasts. So I only use it for sub 6% beers. A 5% beer that feels like a 7% beer is a sneaky beer bargain!

 

[brewcat]

I don't really like it. It may just be the strain as a whole. I pick up a flavor I don't like. Have picked up the same thing in commercial brews. First time I picked it up in hombrew was with US-05. I kind of lean towards the yeast more so than recipe. Not really sure... Not necessarily picking it up in a current brew with the yeast. Probably will just avoid the strain.

 

[MHBT]

I tried to like us05 but it never made a beer I was thrilled with..im all about wlp 001,pacman,1056,1272 for my clean ales oh yeah denny's favorite 50 is great too..2 thumbs down for us05

 

[aprichman]

I would urge everyone to keep in mind that all tasters have different thresholds for identifying flavor compounds. Think of a normal curve - some tasters will be very sensitive to certain compounds while others very insensitive.

 

[Bobcatbrewing42]

Maybe it's just me, but I have really had some not so good flavors come out of this "clean" yeast. From fruity, peach like flavors to a almost Belgian like aroma and off flavor. Not to mention the time it takes for this yeast to drop out. I've cold crashed for a week and still had lots of yeast in suspension. I brew all grain. Pitch hydrated yeast or a appropriate amount of slurry if I have It. Use temp control and tried temps from 62 up to 70. Feel like I have my processes dialed in. The beers I've made with other yeasts have been better than the ones with 05. I think this yeast will be off the list for me from here on out.

After about 100 batches and lots of yeast experiments, I still see SO5 as a trusty go-to with clean finish and minimal estery tastes. I like about 64 degrees better than the manufacturers recommendation of 68. Seventy seems to be in the banana ester zone for most yeasts.