Dry Yeast, Liquid Yeast Equivalents

[menschmaschine]

Does anyone know of a resource similar to this yeast comparison chart, but for dry yeast? That is, what are the equivalent strains of White Labs and Wyeast for Danstar, Fermentis, etc.? I know a few of them, but I've never seen a well-documented list.


UPDATE (04-15-2009):
Here is a list of "rough equivalents". Some may be the same strain and some may just be good substitutes. There are many missing and some may not even have good equivalents. Let us know if you have additions or knowledge for changes. I'll update this as info comes in.

UPDATE (05-17-2009):
I added a few more after coming upon some new information on a German homebrewing forum that seems to have some credibility based on correspondences with Wyeast regarding Fermentis strains.

Danstar:
Nottingham ≈ WLP039 ≈ Wyeast ??
Windsor ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast ??
Diamond Lager ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast ??
Munich Wheat Beer ≈ WLP351≈ Wyeast 3638

Fermentis
Safale S-04 ≈ WLP007 ≈ Wyeast 1099 (1098?)
Safale S-05 ≈ WLP001 ≈ Wyeast 1056
Safale K-97 ≈ WLP320(?) or WLP036(?) ≈ Wyeast 1007(?)

Saflager S-23 ≈ WLP820(?) ≈ Wyeast 2206(?)
Saflager S-189 ≈ Platinum WLP885(?)≈ Wyeast 2278(?)
Saflager W34/70 ≈ WLP830 ≈ Wyeast 2124

Safbrew T-58 ≈ WLP500(?) (WLP540?) ≈ Wyeast 1214(?) (1762?)
Safbrew S-33 ≈ WLP005(?) ≈ Wyeast 1187(?)
Safbrew WB-06 ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast 3056(?)

Muntons
Standard Ale Yeast ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast ??
Premium Gold Ale Yeast ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast ??

Cooper's
Cooper's Ale Yeast ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast ??

Brewferm
Brewferm Blanche ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast??

Superior
Superior Dry Lager Yeast ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast??

 

[Parker36]

I've never seen one either, but there are so few - I can only think of 3 or 4 ale yeasts off the top of my head that are ever used - that I'm not sure one exists. I'm sure there are some that are comparable, but none that identical like the liquid strains.

 

[Tonedef131]

I have never seen one either but think it would be an extremely valuable resource. Especially to new brewers who are not versed in yeast flavor profiles and just want to match up a dry yeast to it's liquid counterpart listed in a certain recipe.

Another valuable part of such a chart would be a section for "recommended substitutes". There is not as many strains available dry and it would be helpful to know which ones are closest to certain liquid strains.

 

[Parker36]

Another valuable part of such a chart would be a section for "recommended substitutes". There is not as many strains available dry and it would be helpful to know which ones are closest to certain liquid strains.

I have seen a graphic that showed a bunch of different yeast (mostly dry, but with a few of the "standard" liquid yeasts) that showed compartive attenuation, ester production, and temp range, and recommended styles. I'll try to dig it up.

 

[Freezeblade]

these are the ones I know:

s-04 = WLP007 (or so I hear)
s-05 = WLP001 (once again, hearsay)
notty = WLP039

I'm not sure about the wb-06 or the lager ones, I've never used 'em

 

[Tonedef131]

s-04 = WLP007 (or so I hear)

I believe S-04 is 1099 Whitbread Ale Yeast.

I have also heard that T-58 is the Chimay strain...but I have no idea if this is accurate or not.

 

[menschmaschine]

If we can get a list going with some relative certainty, I'll add it/update it to my OP for a good reference thread.

Fermentis Saflager W34/70 = White Labs WLP830 = Wyeast 2124.

 

[menschmaschine]

I believe S-04 is 1099 Whitbread Ale Yeast.

I put it as 1098 in my list above because the Mr. Malty link refers to both WLP007 and Wyeast 1098 as "Whitbread- dry" and 1099 is just referred to as "Whitbread", but you could be right.

 

[Tonedef131]

I put it as 1098 in my list above because the Mr. Malty link refers to both WLP007 and Wyeast 1098 as "Whitbread- dry" and 1099 is just referred to as "Whitbread", but you could be right.

Could very well be, I assumed it wasn't the "dry" one since the yeast never goes very dry for me.

Is Superior still making that dry lager yeast? I haven't seen it for sale anywhere in a long time.

 

[lamarguy]

Danstar Munich Wheat Beer = WLP351, though not quite as phenolic.

 

[menschmaschine]

Is Superior still making that dry lager yeast? I haven't seen it for sale anywhere in a long time.

You may be right. I couldn't find a manufacturer's website. I still have a couple packs in my fridge from a couple years ago.:cross:

Danstar Munich Wheat Beer = WLP351, though not quite as phenolic.

Is it the same strain?... or do they just perform/taste similar?

 

[lamarguy]

Is it the same strain?... or do they just perform/taste similar?

It's supposed to be the same strain. I've used both and they taste very similar, except the White Labs version is a little more phenolic.

Danstar Munich Wheat Beer yeast originated in Bavaria, Germany, the home of many of the world’s great wheat beer breweries. The propagation and drying processes for Munich yeast has been specifically designed to deliver high quality brewing yeast that can be used to produce wheat beers of the finest quality.

 

[menschmaschine]

Anyone know Danstar's Windsor? There's got to be equivalent liquid strains for that one.

 

[944play]

Saflager S-189 ≈ WLP?? ≈ Wyeast 2278(?)

Rumor is that S-189 is the Samichlaus strain, same as the Platinum WLP885. Fermentis says it's from Hürlimann. I just ordered four packets, now I have to think of something to brew.

 

[menschmaschine]

Rumor is that S-189 is the Samichlaus strain, same as the Platinum WLP885. Fermentis says it's from Hürlimann. I just ordered four packets, now I have to think of something to brew.

Added. Thanks!

 

[balto charlie]

What about WLP002? Does any dry yeast have flocculation like 002 with 65% attenuation?? Thanks
PS I know this is an old post but it needs some more input

 

[Driver]

I realize this is an old thread but it had my interest so I thought maybe more might come across it. I just brewed a very simple extract beer w T-58. In my opinion it is closest to WLP300 although I didn't really get clove... just banana w possibly citrus. Admittedly, there was zero wheat in my recipe which (I think) helps certain yeasts generate their characteristics.

 

[golphur]

Any updates to the Dry substitutes for Liquid yeasts?

I'm still a noob and don't want to try liquid when dry has been working fantastic for me.

Primarily looking for a good 3068 or 3638 dry sub.

 

[Lucky_Chicken]

you might be intrested in this I found while searching for the same thing

http://finnhillbrewing.blogspot.com/2010/12/liquiddry-yeast-chart-by-style.html

it is mostly derived from Jamil Z's book "Brewing Classic Styles"

 

[Cubslover]

Good find there!

C&P....

Category/Style ...................White Labs ...... Wyeast ...... Dry

1. Light Lager
Lite American Lager ............ WLP840 ...... WY2007 ...... Saflager S-23
Standard American Lager ..... WLP840 ...... WY2007 ...... Saflager S-23
Premium American Lager ....... WLP840 .......WY2007 ...... Saflager S-23
Munich Helles ..................... WLP838 ...... WY2308 ...... Saflager S-23
Dortmunder Export .............. WLP830 ...... WY2124 ...... Saflager S-23

2. Pilsner
German Pilsner ................... WLP830 ...... WY2124 ...... Saflager S-23
Bohemian Pilsner ................ WLP800 ...... WY2001 ...... Saflager S-23
Classic American Pilsner ....... WLP800 ...... WY2001 ...... Saflager S-23

3. European
Amber Lager Vienna Lager ... WLP838 ...... WY2308 ...... Saflager S-23
Oktoberfest/Märzen ............WLP820 ...... WY2206 ...... Saflager S-23

4. Dark Lager
Dark American Lager .......... WLP840 ...... WY2007 ...... Saflager S-23
Munich Dunkel .................. WLP833 ...... WY2308 ...... Saflager S-23
Schwarzbier ..................... WLP830 ...... WY2124 ...... Saflager S-23

5. Bock
Maibock .......................... WLP833 ...... WY2206 ...... Saflager S-23
Traditional Bock ................ WLP833 ...... WY2206 ...... Saflager S-23
Doppelbock ...................... WLP833 ...... WY2206 ...... Saflager S-23
Eisbock ........................... WLP830 ...... WY2124 ...... Saflager S-23

6. Light Hybrid Beer
Cream Ale ........................ WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Blonde Ale ........................ WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Kolsch ............................. WLP029 ...... WY2565 ...... Safale US-05
American Wheat or Rye ....... WLP320 ...... WY1010 ...... Safale US-05

7. Amber
Hybrid Beer N. German Alt .... WLP036 ...... WY1007 ...... Saflager S-23
Dusseldorf Altbier ............... WLP036 ...... WY1007 ...... Safale US-05

8. English Pale Ale
Standard/Ordinary Bitter ...... WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04
Special/Best/Premium Bitter .. WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04
ESB ................................. WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04

9. Scottish & Irish Ale
Scottish Light 60/- ............... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Scottish Heavy 70/- ............. WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Scottish Export 80/- ............. WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Irish Red Ale ........................ WLP004 ...... WY1084 ...... Safale US-05
Strong Scotch Ale ................ WLP028 ...... WY1728 ...... Safale US-05

10. American Ale
American Pale Ale ................. WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
American Amber Ale .............. WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
American Brown Ale .............. WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05

11. English Brown Ale
Mild ................................... WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04
Southern English Brown ......... WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04
Northern English Brown .......... WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham

12. Porter
Brown Porter ....................... WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham
Robust Porter ...................... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Baltic Porter ........................ WLP885 ...... WY830 ...... Saflager S-23

13. Stout
Dry Stout ........................... WLP004 ...... WY1084 ...... Safale US-05
Sweet Stout ....................... WLP006 ...... WY1099 ...... Safale S-04
Oatmeal Stout ..................... WLP002 ...... WY1968 ...... Safale S-04
Stout ................................. WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham
American Stout .................... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Russian Imperial Stout ........... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05

14. India Pale Ale
English IPA ........................... WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham
American IPA ........................ WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05
Imperial IPA .......................... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05

18. Belgian Strong Ale
Belgian Blonde Ale .................. WLP500 ...... WY1214 ...... Safbrew T-58
Belgian Tripel ........................ WLP530 ...... WY3787 ...... Safbrew T-58
Belgian Golden Strong Ale ........ WLP570 ...... WY1388 ...... Safbrew T-58
Belgian Dark Strong Ale ........... WLP530 ...... WY1762 ...... Safbrew T-61

19. Strong Ale
Old Ale .................................. WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham
English Barley Wine .................. WLP013 ...... WY1028 ...... Nottingham
American Barley Wine ............... WLP001 ...... WY1056 ...... Safale US-05

 

[Sheldon]

quite an organized list, thanks, i like using dry and this will help.

sheldon

 

[torque2k]

I've gotta say, even though Jamil's book is heavily perused in my household, I have to disagree with the Scottish Ale choice (on that chart, as well as in JZ's book). WLP001 is just too clean, IMHO. I've done a 70/- with his recipe and WLP001, as well as with WLP028, and a batch from Northern Brewer with WLP028, and I prefer the yeast profile with the Edinburgh strain. A bit more earthy, and it brings out the perceived smokiness in the specialty grains. With 001, it's a good beer, but more like an mild. With 028, it's in a class by itself.

 

[Zuljin]

Bingo! Just what I was looking for. Except that I want to go from dry to liquid so I have to read this right to left. :cross:

I've always made starters from dry yeast because it makes me feel good to see the yeast working before pitching. Recently, I started learning that I aint suhposed to do that. Whatever. It does work. But hey, if I can get equivalent liquid yeasts to make my feel good starters, all the better.

Any new thoughts on these lists?

 

[hop_head76]

Anyone know Danstar's Windsor? There's got to be equivalent liquid strains for that one.

Anyone have anything on this? I know ibrewmaster/northern brewer use wyeast 1332 as the liquid option for the caribou slobber kit where Windsor is the dry yeast. I would really like to find a white labs option as that's what is available at the lhbs.

 

[Sheldon]

http://alestolagers.blogspot.com/2010/05/for-hombrewer-dry-yeast-substitution.html

this is a partial list I found. I have a bit more extensive list if you are interested.

Sheldon

 

[LeFreek]

I combined info from lots of sources into the table enclosed showing Wyeast# - brewery - WhiteLabs# - dry yeast. Please feel free to comment and update.

View attachment yeast_table_lefreek_20130628.pdf

 

[Cubslover]

Nice job!

 

[AmarikinBrew]

I combined info from lots of sources into the table enclosed showing Wyeast# - brewery - WhiteLabs# - dry yeast. Please feel free to comment and update.

View attachment 131784

Thanx for this effort. Good job!

 

[dmtaylor]

10 years later...

I'll just leave this here.

YEAST MASTER Perma-Living by Yours Truly

 

[hilljack13]

10 years later...

I'll just leave this here.

YEAST MASTER Perma-Living by Yours Truly

Thanks. I'm trying, or more like I have been meaning to, build a list of dry yeast equivalents. On the chart I am bit confused. For instance, most of my searches equate 34/70 to Diamond and/or M76.

On the chart, lines 91 & 92, the three above show they are not equivalent to neither of the White Labs/Wyeast strains listed? Is this correct?
Line 95 list Diamond and M76 as equivalent to the listed liquid. Would this imply the two as similar dry strains? Why would 34/70 not be?

Line 115 you ( or Langdon and Suregork) have 34/70 as equivalent to an American Lager. Not arguing since I still have to do my own testing, but all other things I read have this as a German Lager. Just the first time I've see it otherwise.

I could probably find some sources showing others opinion the three dry are similar, I'm just too lazy right now, which was already established!

 

[dmtaylor]

Thanks. I'm trying, or more like I have been meaning to, build a list of dry yeast equivalents. On the chart I am bit confused. For instance, most of my searches equate 34/70 to Diamond and/or M76.

On the chart, lines 91 & 92, the three above show they are not equivalent to neither of the White Labs/Wyeast strains listed? Is this correct?
Line 95 list Diamond and M76 as equivalent to the listed liquid. Would this imply the two as similar dry strains? Why would 34/70 not be?

Line 115 you ( or Langdon and Suregork) have 34/70 as equivalent to an American Lager. Not arguing since I still have to do my own testing, but all other things I read have this as a German Lager. Just the first time I've see it otherwise.

I could probably find some sources showing others opinion the three dry are similar, I'm just too lazy right now, which was already established!

You are parroting the wisdom of the distant past from 10-30 years ago. A lot of genetic testing has been completed over the last 5 years or so which called into question everything we thought we knew about yeast origins and equivalencies. Which is one of my reasons for spending hundreds of hours sifting through all the data to come up with a new table.

Genetic testing shows that W-34/70 (the dry version) is most closely related to something no one would have guessed: Wyeast 2035 American Lager. More than likely, it is the “American” lager that has an unfortunately misleading name, as we would all hope we could believe that W-34/70 was sourced from the Weihenstephan bank and that that was not a mistske or a lie.

In truth, all lager yeasts are very closely related and with few exceptions I would generally have no qualms about subbing any one for another.

 

[AmarikinBrew]

10 years later...

I'll just leave this here.

YEAST MASTER Perma-Living by Yours Truly

That's why it's good info. Genetics and we can compare and drill to the core.
So yea, leave it here then.

 

[AmarikinBrew]

You are parroting the wisdom of the distant past from 10-30 years ago. A lot of genetic testing has been completed over the last 5 years or so which called into question everything we thought we knew about yeast origins and equivalencies. Which is one of my reasons for spending hundreds of hours sifting through all the data to come up with a new table.

Genetic testing shows that W-34/70 (the dry version) is most closely related to something no one would have guessed: Wyeast 2035 American Lager. More than likely, it is the “American” lager that has an unfortunately misleading name, as we would all hope we could believe that W-34/70 was sourced from the Weihenstephan bank and that that was not a mistske or a lie.

In truth, all lager yeasts are very closely related and with few exceptions I would generally have no qualms about subbing any one for another.

To me, the genetics are just showing how yeasts were passed from brewery to brewery. When does a strain become a new one? Do we get a new "genetic" after mutations of how many thousands of gallons of use? That was the old way. Now are "they" just inserting or removing traits from these same cells to make a name for themselves and a new "genetic" yeast?
Why not just let nature take it's course in the old way instead of "tailoring" for some fad style?
The yeast world goes mad then like the rest of the world.
An old list like this tells me what we used to use the "core" genetics to a style, like what brewery it came from.
So yea let leave it here, or mebbe place in a bronze tube and cover over with the bricks in the wall of a new brewery being built.
Information never dies... it "transforms".

 

[dmtaylor]

To me, the genetics are just showing how yeasts were passed from brewery to brewery. When does a strain become a new one? Do we get a new "genetic" after mutations of how many thousands of gallons of use? That was the old way. Now are "they" just inserting or removing traits from these same cells to make a name for themselves and a new "genetic" yeast?
Why not just let nature take it's course in the old way instead of "tailoring" for some fad style?
The yeast world goes mad then like the rest of the world.
An old list like this tells me what we used to use the "core" genetics to a style, like what brewery it came from.
So yea let leave it here, or mebbe place in a bronze tube and cover over with the bricks in the wall of a new brewery being built.
Information never dies... it "transforms".

Genetic modification (GMO) is happening, but not much quite yet. None of the yeast strains listed on my table or any others are GMO. Maybe in a few more years there will be a few.

A strain becomes a "new one" pretty much the moment it is pitched. Yeast are mutating naturally all the time. After a couple of repitches into multiple batches of the same wort, you can end up with different beers. This is also why we should always talk about "equivelencies" as being approximations... none of these yeasts can be truly equivalent, except where they are repacks (e.g., Mangrove Jack). Otherwise, they are truly just "equivalent for most intents & purposes".

Regarding data and information... I originally started with Kristen England's equivalency table from MrMalty.com, then my table grew from there. But it is based on many many inputs... you might notice that "KE" is barely a source reference anymore. His data has indeed largely become obsolete, for various reasons, a big one being genetics but that's not the only one either.

 

[mac_1103]

An old list like this tells me what we used to use the "core" genetics to a style, like what brewery it came from.

No it doesn't. It tells you that the information people were able to piece together before genome sequencing, like what brewery it came from, was often incorrect.

 

[mac_1103]

A strain becomes a "new one" pretty much the moment it is pitched. Yeast are mutating naturally all the time. After a couple of repitches into multiple batches of the same wort, you can end up with different beers.

FWIW, this has been posted here before.

 

[dmtaylor]

No it doesn't. It tells you that the information people were able to piece together before genome sequencing, like what brewery it came from, was often incorrect.

*Was USUALLY incorrect.

 

[AmarikinBrew]

Yea, I'm old skool, I can't spell "GMO" lest remember where to apply the moniker. So that's where I was going I guess.

 

[AmarikinBrew]

*Was USUALLY incorrect.

Was it incorrect? Or just an approximation of where a certain taste on beers/aroma/ect as a snapshot in time at that particular brewery? Then the yeast morphed and we got cornfused <sp intentional>, then another brewery grabbed it and decided it now was a fit to their style? As we see now, we weren't tracking a brewery, but traits of a mutation IMO.
GMO, IMO will make that time snapshot impossible to follow eventually.
I like following history, even if it's just beer yeast.
I'm tired, rambling, I work mid shift and need to get some sleep.

 

[mac_1103]

GMO, IMO will make that time snapshot impossible to follow eventually.

What? The deliberate introduction of a known mutation into a known genome makes it easier to follow the genetics, not harder. There are reasons to be anti-GMO, but this isn't one of them.

Was it incorrect?

Yes. Demonstrably so.