Dry yeasts identified - your opinions please!

[Miraculix]

I have never used this yeast myself, but there is a very clear consensus among German homebrewers (on the hobbybrauer.de forum and those that I know in person) that it is not suitable for Hefeweizen. One of the moderators of the forum reported talking to employees the manufacturer at some event and having them admit it was not a Hefeweizen strain.
YES, this is very much second-hand at this point, I'm just a random guy on the internet who picked up something from some other guy on the internet. Anecdotal at best. (Luckily, Vale71 cannot read this post and roast me for being a troll, as that has already happened.)

I think the issue most people have with the yeast is that the beer comes out too dry, sharp and tangy, with a strange sort of bitter harshness.

Greetings fellow troll, and let me welcome you to troll land. You will see (Vale will not), there are many of us among the fellow homebrewers within this very forum that have been appointed troll by his highness the great Vale71 (may he live long and prosperous). So welcome to the club, sit back, relax, have a homebrew and enjoy the companionship of some of the most knowledgeable trolls the whole wide internet has to offer

 

[dmtaylor]

Hello I just made my first batch and I want to know if Red Star Active Dry Yeast is the right yeast to use and how long in 2liters plastic bottles if I made it Last Saturday bottling after the yeast and setting them under the cold porch

Red Star Active Dry Yeast is intended for making bread and is not often used for making beer. You'll still get beer, but don't be surprised if it has a sort of tart flavor and tastes more bready than other beers. Next time, try any of an array of other dried yeasts from a homebrew shop. Check out Danstar-Lallemand, Fermentis, and Mangrove Jack brands, just to name a few.

 

[dmtaylor]

Genetically, maybe, but it has the fermentation kinetics and ester/phenol flavour profile of a Weizen yeast and is excellently suited for brewing that style. Just about all craft breweries here use WB-06 for Weizen. So if it looks, walks, quacks and tastes like a duck...

I found WB-06 to be not very good in a hefeweizen. More tartness than anything resembling clove or banana. At least the couple times I have tried it.

 

[dmtaylor]

Heh... I don't know that I have been "declared" yet. LOL. Bound to happen sooner or later. We'll just leave it at that for now, my friends.

 

[Hanglow]

Munich Classic makes a very good weizen, WB-06 does not (imo of course ).

I've never heard of Belle Saison being related to the Dupont yeast, it is not really like it imo and I've used it quite a few times (and like it) and have drunk many a litre of Saison Dupont. Albeit never compared beers made with belle saison directly with saison dupont.

The main things I get from Belle Saison is a slightly pepperyness, a bit of lemon/citrus flavour, great attenuation and a big body as it produces so much glycerol, noticably more than any other yeast I've used. It also drops bright.

 

[frankvw]

I have never used this yeast myself, but there is a very clear consensus among German homebrewers (on the hobbybrauer.de forum and those that I know in person) that it is not suitable for Hefeweizen. One of the moderators of the forum reported talking to employees the manufacturer at some event and having them admit it was not a Hefeweizen strain.

I'm in South Africa (the backside of the world, by most accounts) and I agree that a South African brewed Weizen (almost invariably with WB-06) is not on par with imported bottles of German Hefeweizen. That said, it's the closest thing Fermentis supplies, and since Fermentis has the entire SA market for dried brewing yeast cornered (mostly because Lallemand's local distributor doesn't seem interested in selling these yeasts and Lallemand doesn't seem interested in changing that) WB-06 is pretty much what we've got. Some larger microbreweries (millibreweries, rather) in the Cape probably use liquid strains since their products are a lot better, but else in the country it's all WB-06.

YES, this is very much second-hand at this point, I'm just a random guy on the internet who picked up something from some other guy on the internet. Anecdotal at best. (Luckily, Vale71 cannot read this post and roast me for being a troll, as that has already happened.)

Well, that's pretty much a rite of passage here, isn't it?

I think the issue most people have with the yeast is that the beer comes out too dry, sharp and tangy, with a strange sort of bitter harshness.

It does indeed have its drawbacks. However, it is definitely possible to brew a decent Weizen with it. Most brewers use 2nd and/or 3rd generation WB-06 which suggests that the drying process may play a role here. Most agree, however, that if you want to make a Kristallweizen with it, filtering is a bitch.

 

[monkeymath]

I've never heard of Belle Saison being related to the Dupont yeast

I think people are suggesting Belle Saison is the dry-yeast equivalent of wyeast 3711 French Saison, which "the internet" assumes to be Thiriez' yeast (as opposed to 3724, which is supposed to be Dupont's strain or 'one of Dupont's strains', depending on the source).

I don't like Belle Saison (or MJs "French Saison", which I fathom is the same) very much. A lot of homebrewers describe the resulting beer as "dry", but I very very strongly disagree. The residual extract will be super low (often <1.0), but the beer is actually quite sweet and full bodied, which I guess comes from the tons of glycerol it produces. I guess the low residual extract somehow tricks people's minds into thinking it was "dry". (Or, possibly, my own perception is off)

A craft brewery in Hamburg made a "Brut IPA" using that yeast, and while it wasn't bad, it definitely wasn't "brut".

 

[Miraculix]

I think people are suggesting Belle Saison is the dry-yeast equivalent of wyeast 3711 French Saison, which "the internet" assumes to be Thiriez' yeast (as opposed to 3724, which is supposed to be Dupont's strain or 'one of Dupont's strains', depending on the source).

I don't like Belle Saison (or MJs "French Saison", which I fathom is the same) very much. A lot of homebrewers describe the resulting beer as "dry", but I very very strongly disagree. The residual extract will be super low (often <1.0), but the beer is actually quite sweet and full bodied, which I guess comes from the tons of glycerol it produces. I guess the low residual extract somehow tricks people's minds into thinking it was "dry". (Or, possibly, my own perception is off)

A craft brewery in Hamburg made a "Brut IPA" using that yeast, and while it wasn't bad, it definitely wasn't "brut".

I agree, it is only dry on the paper but the actual taste is far away from being dry. I actually like that very much because it is not sweet either. I just miss something there on regards to yeast expression which I would expect from a saison strain.

 

[dmtaylor]

I agree, it is only dry on the paper but the actual taste is far away from being dry. I actually like that very much because it is not sweet either. I just miss something there on regards to yeast expression which I would expect from a saison strain.

I get pepper and lemon and the slightest hints of "Belgian" flavor, whatever that means. I'm not sure how else a saison is supposed to taste but that hits all the marks for me.

I've no idea if Belle or 3711 are actually from Dupont. They might be, and might not be. What I do think is that they are very similar strains, same performance, same characters.

I'll also agree that the final beer tastes not as dry as the FG shows. Thanks @monkeymath for the additional info assuming it's true.

 

[Miraculix]

I get pepper and lemon and the slightest hints of "Belgian" flavor, whatever that means. I'm not sure how else a saison is supposed to taste but that hits all the marks for me.

I've no idea if Belle or 3711 are actually from Dupont. They might be, and might not be. What I do think is that they are very similar strains, same performance, same characters.

I'll also agree that the final beer tastes not as dry as the FG shows. Thanks @monkeymath for the additional info assuming it's true.

Yes, i also get these flavours but heavily muted compared to the good saisons I had. Those where bombs of yeast flavour, whereas belle is just a small hint of it in comparison. I tried fermenting it high, low, high og, low og... Just stays muted in flavour.

 

[Albionwood]

I think people are suggesting Belle Saison is the dry-yeast equivalent of wyeast 3711 French Saison, which "the internet" assumes to be Thiriez' yeast (as opposed to 3724, which is supposed to be Dupont's strain or 'one of Dupont's strains', depending on the source).

Yes to all that. And also agreement that the dried Belle/French Saison yeast does not express as much Saison character as some of the liquid yeasts will.

I don't like Belle Saison (or MJs "French Saison", which I fathom is the same) very much. A lot of homebrewers describe the resulting beer as "dry", but I very very strongly disagree. The residual extract will be super low (often <1.0), but the beer is actually quite sweet and full bodied, which I guess comes from the tons of glycerol it produces. I guess the low residual extract somehow tricks people's minds into thinking it was "dry". (Or, possibly, my own perception is off)

I think it's a question of what is meant by "dry." I've had M29 take beers down to 1.000, which is certainly dry. Yet as you say, the beers often do not _taste_ dry, because the yeast produces complex carbohydrates which some palates perceive as sweetness.

To me, dryness is a measurable and quantifiable parameter; what it tastes like is another matter altogether. If the sugars are gone, it's dry. If there's a lot of glycerol and it tastes sweet, it's still dry, but our palates have been fooled. (cf. Wine.)

The characteristics of M29/Belle Saison (subdued Saison character, extreme attenuation, complex carbohydrates) combined to give me an unexpected but glorious Biere de Garde a couple of years ago. Started out as a Dark Saison but after a couple months in the bottle, the yeast character disappeared and it became super-malty but still dry. I have got to try that again.

 

[monkeymath]

To me, dryness is a measurable and quantifiable parameter; what it tastes like is another matter altogether. If the sugars are gone, it's dry. If there's a lot of glycerol and it tastes sweet, it's still dry, but our palates have been fooled. (cf. Wine.)

It's interesting that we'd use the term in such different ways. To me, 'dry' is purely a descriptor of the perception. In my opinion, the word "dry" is simply superfluous if meant to describe high attenuation or low residual extract: we can already express these in a precise, even quantifiable way.

What's more, you will very often find the term in descriptions of beverages, be it wine or beer. Afaik, the term has an "analytical meaning" in the wine world, where it designates a certain ratio of sugars and acids. But from what I gather - and I may very well be wrong here - this is mostly relevant for the purpose of labeling the product accurately (so as to inform the customer) and categorizing it.

 

[Albionwood]

It's interesting that we'd use the term in such different ways. To me, 'dry' is purely a descriptor of the perception. In my opinion, the word "dry" is simply superfluous if meant to describe high attenuation or low residual extract: we can already express these in a precise, even quantifiable way.

What's more, you will very often find the term in descriptions of beverages, be it wine or beer. Afaik, the term has an "analytical meaning" in the wine world, where it designates a certain ratio of sugars and acids. But from what I gather - and I may very well be wrong here - this is mostly relevant for the purpose of labeling the product accurately (so as to inform the customer) and categorizing it.

Maybe it's just because I am a cidermaker, and with cider (as with all wines) "dry" simply means no residual sugar. (Acidity has nothing to do with it.) I'm curious whether it actually means anything different in beer, because I can't find any references that match the way you use it. (Truly dry beers used to be pretty rare, because few yeasts will metabolize all the complex sugars in wort. Now there's an enzyme to simplify those sugars, making Brut IPAs and the like possible.)

Certainly everyone agrees that the perception of dryness/sweetness is not the same as actual dryness/sweetness. Everyone's taste works uniquely and the perception of sweetness in a "dry" wine/cider/beer can vary widely from person to person. But the actual degree of dryness is not a matter of taste.

So basically I'm saying... yeah, I think you're wrong here. But it could be me... naah, that can't be. Cheers!

 

[monkeymath]

with cider (as with all wines) "dry" simply means no residual sugar. (Acidity has nothing to do with it.)

At least within the European Union, acidity does have something to do with it (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweetness_of_wine and the references therein).

Certainly everyone agrees that the perception of dryness/sweetness is not the same as actual dryness/sweetness.

Well, I always knew I was something special, sp this "everyone" does not include me. A Coca Cola made with artificial sweeteners is still sweet. You cannot just take a common term like "sweetness" and then tell everyone they are using it incorrectly. You don't need to run a lab test to determine if a desert is sweet.

 

[frankvw]

I think it's a question of what is meant by "dry." I've had M29 take beers down to 1.000, which is certainly dry. Yet as you say, the beers often do not _taste_ dry, because the yeast produces complex carbohydrates which some palates perceive as sweetness.

Agreed. Both fruity esters and diacetyl can make a beer sweet and full-bodied on the palate while the final gravity is in fact extremely low. However, depending on fermentation conditions (DO, temperature, pitching rate etc) the production of these compounds may occur in a greater or lesser measure, so if you mash cool, pitch generously, oxygenate properly and ferment cool with a warm finish, your beer may come out extremely dry. Using a yeast with a low apparent attenuation does not give you this option. So I'm considering the dry character a possibility that may occur depending on a variety of other factors.

To me, dryness is a measurable and quantifiable parameter; what it tastes like is another matter altogether. If the sugars are gone, it's dry. If there's a lot of glycerol and it tastes sweet, it's still dry, but our palates have been fooled. (cf. Wine.)

Absolutely!

The characteristics of M29/Belle Saison (subdued Saison character, extreme attenuation, complex carbohydrates) combined to give me an unexpected but glorious Biere de Garde a couple of years ago. Started out as a Dark Saison but after a couple months in the bottle, the yeast character disappeared and it became super-malty but still dry. I have got to try that again.

Like so many other dried yeasts (Fermentis comes to mind) Belle Saison is not a bad yeast per sé. It's just not the best yeast for what it's marketed for. But it can (and does) produce some stunning beers indeed.

 

[ten80]

Agreed. Both fruity esters and diacetyl can make a beer sweet and full-bodied on the palate while the final gravity is in fact extremely low. .

Don't forget that Belle saison is purported to produce high concentrations of glycerol, much like some wine yeasts. A little glycerol goes a long ways to reducing apparent dryness.

 

[foolsbrew]

Just posting to say thank you, I keep referring to this thread when comparing American and European recipes. Stellar work.

 

[dmtaylor]

Unable to edit post #2 above. To those interested, use the following link instead folks, I'm not maintaining the previous link any longer:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16XRUloO3WXqH9Ixsf5vx2DIKDmrEQJ36tLRBmmya7Jo/edit?usp=sharing

 

[ebbelwoi]

Dave, I'm wondering about two dry yeasts:

You have MJ's M20 Bavarian Wheat listed as Munich Classic, WLP300, W68. The M20 reviews I've read don't seem to agree with you. I've only made one batch with it, but it came out quite differently than my W68 batches, both liquid and dry.

Also, a few people are saying that Lallemand's Diamond Lager is w34/70, but Andreas a.k.a. AK a.k.a. daft eedjit wrote on reddit recently that it's W308/WY2308. I PMed him about it (on reddit) but haven't heard back.

Any thoughts on either of these? Thanks.

 

[dmtaylor]

Dave, I'm wondering about two dry yeasts:

You have MJ's M20 Bavarian Wheat listed as Munich Classic, WLP300, W68. The M20 reviews I've read don't seem to agree with you. I've only made one batch with it, but it came out quite differently than my W68 batches, both liquid and dry.

Also, a few people are saying that Lallemand's Diamond Lager is w34/70, but Andreas a.k.a. AK a.k.a. daft eedjit wrote on reddit recently that it's W308/WY2308. I PMed him about it (on reddit) but haven't heard back.

Any thoughts on either of these? Thanks.

Thanks for the feedback. I'll definitely look into these deeper next week when I have more time. Heading out of town for 4 days.

 

[dmtaylor]

Dave, I'm wondering about two dry yeasts:

You have MJ's M20 Bavarian Wheat listed as Munich Classic, WLP300, W68. The M20 reviews I've read don't seem to agree with you. I've only made one batch with it, but it came out quite differently than my W68 batches, both liquid and dry.

Also, a few people are saying that Lallemand's Diamond Lager is w34/70, but Andreas a.k.a. AK a.k.a. daft eedjit wrote on reddit recently that it's W308/WY2308. I PMed him about it (on reddit) but haven't heard back.

Any thoughts on either of these? Thanks.

Okay, I've looked into these some more now. I think I found out what happened with the Munich wheat yeasts -- I had attributed M20 to the Munich "Classic", but based on milder flavors, it's probably more in line with the "regular" Lallemand Munich (a.k.a. "Munich Wheat" rather than "Classic"). So I'm updating that based on your feedback. Come to think of it, I didn't even have the "regular" Munich strain on my chart previously, which is part of how I forgot about it. So thanks there.

This analysis on Munich yeasts resulted in a new look at a few other Mangrove Jack yeasts as well, seeking possible candidates for swaps, so now based on more data on flavors and attenuations, I've solidified the previously "yellow" highlighted M31 to go with BE-134 and WLP590, seems a good fit, and kicked M29 from Belle (probably doesn't belong there since M29 is a big banana producer while Belle is not) to Abbaye / WLP500 / 1214 instead. Okay now that made me feel better. See new version at same link as above.

As for the Diamond Lager yeast, I will need more data before making any changes there. For the time being, I think it makes more sense to keep it lumped with other similar dried yeasts including W-34/70, M76, and Superior (assuming I might be correct about those -- and admittedly, maybe not). According to recent genetic studies, W-34/70 might not be quite as German as we thought, but is most closely related to Wyeast 2035 American Lager and WLP810 San Fran "steam" yeast. So, as for the Diamond, I'm still really not sure if that should swing over to 2308. It is possible that that is the right place... but given all the confusion around lager yeasts over the past year, who really knows for sure. If we find a little more evidence, I'll consider moving it or shading it "yellow" by 2308 as a potential future resting place. For now though, I'm not touching it yet.

Thanks again.

 

[mediant]

Taste-wise M20 certainly reminds Mauri Weiss - ample banana, low attenuation, pof+. I've used both and they are most likely the same, quite different character from Munich Classic. Old Munich is pof-, so it can't be it either.
I believe this yeast - Mauri Weiss / M20 / CML Kristal has no matches among either Lallemand or Fermentis offerings.

 

[dmtaylor]

Taste-wise M20 certainly reminds Mauri Weiss - ample banana, low attenuation, pof+. I've used both and they are most likely the same, quite different character from Munich Classic. Old Munich is pof-, so it can't be it either.
I believe this yeast - Mauri Weiss / M20 / CML Kristal has no matches among either Lallemand or Fermentis offerings.

Hmm.... okay.... I'll continue mining data from Google and see where it falls out. Thanks for the additional feedback.

EDIT, LATER: Well, now I'm a little confused. Many M20 reviews claim it gives a lot of clove but low banana. I haven't seen many reviews for other dried weizen strains regarding high clove like that. Mauri on the other hand is said to be mild on both clove and banana and overall kind of underwhelming, which reminds me of "regular" Lallemand Munich more than anything else, or perhaps WB-06 but the attenuation on that one is very high which I don't think is the case for Mauri. I'm trying hard to figure out how it all fits, since I know Mangrove is all repacked from others... but all the pieces don't fit. So... hmm. For now I'll leave it all as-is. But I do thank you.

 

[mediant]

I brewed with M20 and CML Kristall a couple of years ago, Mauri Weiss very recently and Munich Classic about half a dozen times in between. Mauri Weiss instantly reminds of M20 - full bodied on the edge of being sweet, no sulfur, clovy with distinct bubblegum-banana when fermented warm (upper seventies). It's officially pof+, unlike Munich. The esters are more restricted when fermented cold, so I can see where the "underwhelmed" characteristic can be coming from...
Munich Classic is quite different - more dry, tart, lots of sulfur, with esters towards peach-banana.
If anything, Mauri and M20 produce Paulaner-style weiss, while Munich Classic is definitely Weihenstephan.
As for who repackages whom - Mauri is known to have its own yeast production facilities (AB Biotek), and its "antipode connection" with Mangrove has been mentioned here already...
I was skeptical too at first, but now that I've tried all these - I don't see anything remotely close to Mauri Weiss in Lallemand of Fermentins lineups. T-58 maybe, but Weiss lacks its distinct peppery phenols.
This makes me wonder about other Mauri yeast - 514, Draught and Lager 497...

 

[ebbelwoi]

I wanted to post yesterday about Munich and M20, but decided to take another day to think about it.

As I started to write this post, the wife and I were in the middle of a hefeweizen tasting: Paulaner, Franziskaner, Schöfferhofer, one of my W175s (WLP351), my first M20, and a W68+W175. I had a few insights to share, but after a few distractions, and finishing off the beers, I should probably save my thoughts for later.

I'm trying to figure out what M20 is, but I don't think it's Munich (flocculation and attenuation). Paulaner is closer, but unfortunately, my bottle of Paulaner is tasting a bit oxidized (exp. date is 3 months from now). The M20 in storage, at 15C, is starting to clarify, FWIW.

 

[ebbelwoi]

Meant to post this:

The beers were poured one by one, while I was making dinner, so disregard the head.

Can you pick out the M20?

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Hi folks. I've been wondering if any of the dry yeasts on the market are actually blends? Does anyone know? Has any of the DNA testing thrown that up? We often automatically assume that all yeasts sold commercially are single strain, it seems. Mangrove Jacks says their yeast shouldn't be re-pitched which is likely just a ploy to sell more yeast, but it perhaps indicates some blending going on?

For example, the M36 doesn't appear to be like any other dry yeast and I doubt it is uniquely made for them as a single strain? The MJ extract kits were designed for them by James Kemp, a brewer who knows a thing or two about yeast from his spells at some of the best English breweries - Fuller's, Thornbridge, Marble, Buxton, Magic Rock and now Yeastie Boys - so maybe he gave them some advice on putting together some multi-strain dry yeasts for commercial sale that would offer something new and more interesting to the market?

When I spoke to the head of marketing at MJ UK a couple of years ago all he would say is that one of their yeasts is Nottingham. M42 obviously. Oh and he said some of their yeasts are re-packages and some are produced just for them. But not where or how or why or anything. That could presumably mean cloning other producers' strains, or blending them, perhaps.

Am I right in thinking that only a very limited number of producers have the resources to develop and introduce new dry strains? Like Lallemand and Fermentis? And Mauribrew, from their baking yeast operation, I guess. Germany seems to get mentioned, who makes dried yeast there? Who makes Munton's yeasts? Brewferm presumably buys theirs in, possibly a Mauribrew connection?

Cheers!

 

[frankvw]

Hi folks. I've been wondering if any of the dry yeasts on the market are actually blends? Does anyone know?

I have found no evidence of any dry yeast blends being sold commercially. There are some liquid yeast blends (one or two White Labs Belgian Ale yeasts come to mind) but these are specific cases in which the different yeasties pretty much grew up together and play nicely, so to speak, without getting into a tug of war about who ferments what first. There are also still a number of traditional breweries here and there who have a "house yeast" that is actually a culture of multiple (sometimes 4 or more) strains. However, these are strains that work well together and either have adapted to each other or ended up in the blend because of their similar growth and fermentation kinetics.

Most yeast blends are problematic; the various yeasts in the blend begin to compete with each other, and small variations (wort composition, temperature, DO levels and what have you) may result in marked differences in yeast growth and therefore lead to unpredictable results.

Has any of the DNA testing thrown that up?

Not to my knowledge. All we have so far in home brewing land is comparison based on characteristics.

We often automatically assume that all yeasts sold commercially are single strain, it seems. Mangrove Jacks says their yeast shouldn't be re-pitched which is likely just a ploy to sell more yeast, but it perhaps indicates some blending going on?

That was my initial thought as well. Then I learned (from several people in the industry) that they're just repacking. So the "Thou shalt not repitch" admonition is probably smoke and mirrors. As are the small variations in specification on the packages.

For example, the M36 doesn't appear to be like any other dry yeast

Looking at the specs I think they're not all that different:

Yeast	M36 Liberty Bell Ale	Lallemand London English Style Ale (F.k.a. ESB)
Temperature range	18-23	18-22
Attenuation	74-48%	Medium
Flocculation /Sedimentatino	Med-High	Med-High
POF	-	-
Alcohol tolerance	9	12
Flavour profile	Light fruity esters, clean, medium body	Medium esters, quick fermentation
Origin	?	Whitbread descendant? (Uncertain)

The most glaring discrepancy here is the ABV tolerance; however a 12% limit yeast can easily be marketed at a 9% limit yeast to confuse the issue a little for marketing purposes.

and I doubt it is uniquely made for them as a single strain?

Mangrove Jacks / Brewcraft / iMake has no yeast production or development lab, nor do they employ one. They simply repack mainstream brands under their own name with descriptions that are slightly fudged but are still applicable.

The MJ extract kits were designed for them by James Kemp, a brewer who knows a thing or two about yeast from his spells at some of the best English breweries - Fuller's, Thornbridge, Marble, Buxton, Magic Rock and now Yeastie Boys - so maybe he gave them some advice on putting together some multi-strain dry yeasts for commercial sale that would offer something new and more interesting to the market?

A man with his background will know the dangers of yeast blends in a home brewing scenario where all fermentation factors (temperature and DO more than anything else) will vary wildly, so my guess is no, he knew better than that and stuck with the robust and almost Armagheddon-proof Mauri 514 strain. This has been the kit yeast of choice for just about everyone because it's one of the most robust yeasts that is as close to being foolproof as it gets. (AFAIK Mauri 415 is an EDME descendant that emigrated to Australia and adapted to the climate there, which has given it a wide temperature range across which performance is sufficiently similar for kit brewing.)

When I spoke to the head of marketing at MJ UK a couple of years ago all he would say is that one of their yeasts is Nottingham. M42 obviously. Oh and he said some of their yeasts are re-packages and some are produced just for them. But not where or how or why or anything. That could presumably mean cloning other producers' strains, or blending them, perhaps.

There is no dried yeast strain that is uniquely produced for MJ. All their yeasts come from either DCL/Fermentis or Lallemand/Danstar production labs and are packed in MJ packets in a facility in the UK. (The latter I have been told by a rep fairly high up in the tree at DCL/Fermentis.)

Am I right in thinking that only a very limited number of producers have the resources to develop and introduce new dry strains? Like Lallemand and Fermentis? And Mauribrew, from their baking yeast operation, I guess.

You absolutely are.

Germany seems to get mentioned, who makes dried yeast there?

Not sure. There is a yeast production lab in Scandinavia where the Italian multinational AEB has their yeasts produced (based on what I've been told by AEB reps) so maybe they do that for other brands as well.

Who makes Munton's yeasts?

Muntons Standard Yeast is just a classic EDME strain like Fermentis S-33, and these days it probably is S-33. Its flavour profile is closer to S-33 than to the Mauri 514 used for Australian and NZ beer kits yeasts . Muntons Premium Yeast is Nottingham Ale yeast.

Brewferm presumably buys theirs in, possibly a Mauribrew connection?

Brewferm Y015 Blanche = Mauri 1433; Brewferm Y016 lager = Mauri 497; Brewferm Top Fermenting = Mauri 514 (i.e. kit yeast).

Please note: at this point we will now all pause while Vale71 ridicules all the above and claims that none of it has any validity whatsoever but must be considered utter nonsense until proven via extensive trials in a microbiology lab.

Cheers!

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Frank, many thanks for your really detailed response, much appreciated. Some really helpful stuff in there. Some stuff I don't agree with too.

M36 is different from any of the Lallemand or Fermentis yeasts. It's also different from Mauribrew ale, I've used the English yeasts from all of those enough to know. And the many people here in England who have used them would agree about M36, it's a common forum discussion as to what M36 could be. It's either made specially for them, or it's from another company, or it's a blend, IMO.

Windsor and Nottingham is a well trodden path as a yeast blend. English breweries generally use blends, and Notty and Windsor are said to have come from the same multi-strain. It wouldn't really be a risk to put them together, it would be a smart move, perhaps. For one time use.

I have used ESB and M36 and they are not the same. I would say Munton's Standard yeast could be ESB, it is certainly very similar. It's not like S-33. I agree about Muunton's Premium being Notty, but it is slightly different IMO. I suspect it is Nottingham produced in a different set-up than Lallemand. But I could be wrong. I always thought Munton's produced their own yeast, but maybe it is just malts they do. It's certainly a very specialist activity.

The MJ kits use different style specific yeasts, as far as I am aware. MB ale may feature in some of the cheap kits, feasibly. I don't know the Brewferm yeasts well enough to comment on them matching with Mauri strains, I does seem like a neat fit.

Cheers!

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The Suregork genetic study indicates that Muntons, S-33, Windsor, and London ESB are all kissing cousins stemming off of the same grandparent, and that S-33 and Muntons are sisters, and Windsor and London ESB are sisters. And that all of them stem from the genetic category/cluster of bread yeasts. They are not in the category of English or UK Ale yeasts.