Dry yeasts identified - your opinions please!

[Birrofilo]

You are talking about mutation, not adaptation. They're different things. People living at high altitude develop a different physiology than those living at sea level. This is not genetic mutation; it's adaptation. Yeast does the latter. Natural selection does not play a role in this process. It does in random mutation.

I see but adaptation is lost in the next generation. People living at high altitude do not pass to their children this different physiology. The children must acquire it by themselves. The same is for yeast, adaptation of a yeast strain only works for the individuals who are adapted to the environment. Their next generation (the generation of tomorrow, literally ) will not have that adaptation at birth.

A yeast producer cannot sell a yeast which is "adapted" to a certain environment. It's either a genetical character, or it must be acquired from the environment (either nature or nurture, as they say).

 

[tbaldwin000]

You are talking about mutation, not adaptation. They're different things. People living at high altitude develop a different physiology than those living at sea level. This is not genetic mutation; it's adaptation. Yeast does the latter. Natural selection does not play a role in this process. It does in random mutation.

But we digress.

It is random mutation combined with environmental pressures which domesticates yeast to a new environment, not the adaptation of individual cells. Those most suited cells will survive to pass on their specific genetic traits, those less suited will not.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

3 years ago I chatted to a self employed marketing exec who had recently left Mangrove Jacks in Merseyside, England. I asked him where they got their yeasts from and he wouldn't give much away at all ,he said he couldn't - but that one of their yeasts is Nottingham. It's a ll I got but it confirms the re-packaging thing surely, and implicates Lallemand, probably. I have used quite a few MJ yeasts and I feel they are re-packaged, and in some cases blended. M36 is blended I reckon, Nottingham and Windsor, or S-33, perhaps. M44 is likely t be Bry-97. M29 - Belle Saison. M31 is a blend, I'm sure, there are two colours of yeast. Belle Saison and another Belgian, like Abbaye or T-58 maybe. M41 too, I think. M15 could be straight Windsor, or a blend perhaps. M47 could be Abbaye. It's quite likely i guess that MJ has one main supplier and uses blends, and it would be Lallemand if that's the case, I reckon. Wouldn't explain the MJ lager yeasts though. M54, M76 and M84 I don't know about. I know that Mauribrew is a possible source for MJ too, so M54 could be MB Lager? And it seems that Mauribrew makes Cooper's yeasts, some of which are blends, which backs up the blending suspicion a little. MJ's beer kits were the result of using James Kemp, ex- Marble brewer in Manchester and now at Yeastie Boys, as a consultant. The extract kits were quite innovative, including sours, a gose, a barrel aged beer etc. He perhaps also advised on dry yeast blends, which he would understand well as a pro brewer. Just guesswork, that.

I also chatted to the guy who runs CML a year or so ago and he was very cagey, he said they have a supplier but he doesn't know where they get the yeasts from and the only info he has about the yeasts is what he puts on the website, and a code number for each strain. I think he said Germany, but I may have read that and conflated it with that conversation. I think he did say Germany though. He didn't say they made the yeast. For me, CML yeasts don't seem to match other manufacturers' yeasts, in the main at least. Perform differently. YMMV.

 

[frankvw]

It is random mutation combined with environmental pressures which domesticates yeast to a new environment, not the adaptation of individual cells. Those most suited cells will survive to pass on their specific genetic traits, those less suited will not.

That's not quite how yeast behaves. Take high stress fermentations, for example. At high alcohol levels yeast produces smaller daughter cells, and there is considerable indication that this has to do with DNA changes since those smaller daughter cells continue to produce smaller offspring cells in the next fermentation. This is adaptation, not random mutation, even though it results in DNA changes.

However, as I said, we're digressing from the thread subject. Perhaps this is fodder for a new thread!

 

[mediant]

Then they mostly switched to "a German yeast manufacturer", possibly www.malzwerkstatt.de

More recently they've introduced the likes of Four and Five which are blatantly S-04 and US-05, presumably they're now doing enough volume to be able to use multiple suppliers and which would also help them hedge against any logistics disruption from Brexit.

This is what Steven himself says about German pedigree of CML yeast

C'mon, everything this guy tells is BS:

His main business until recently was plumbing and handyman:

And here's the accounting data for CML:

 

[Kold Brygg]

@frankvw @dmtaylor

Don't know if this german comparison between Brewferm Blanche-Godzawa Classic Belgian Wit is of any interest for your spreadsheets.
https://hobbybrauer.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=719
They also have a Godzawa experience thread for anyone interested
https://hobbybrauer.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2007&

 

[ebbelwoi]

For what it's worth, I did a side-by-side-by-side batch of Mangrove Jack's M54, Fermentis K-97, and Mauribrew 497 lager.

During fermentation, the M54 and K-97 behaved very similarly in terms of when the krausen appeared, how high it got, when it receded, and the final gravity. It became clear early on that 497 was a different strain.

The beer was my third iteration of "Old '97", amber/alt. I had previously brewed it twice with K-97 and once with M54, and thought they tasted similar across batches. I usually use Tettnanger but went with Motueka this time. I used a pitch rate of 1g/L for all three yeasts. I drank the Mauribrew weeks ago, but just tried the M54 and K-97 today, after 6 weeks of lagering at 1C. Both refused to clear on their own, and both took a week to clear after the same dose of Silafine.

The M54 and K-97 tasted very similar to me. I couldn't tell them apart. I don't have the most reliable palate, but that was my experience.

 

[Protos]

I too did a side by side comparison between M54 and K97 once. I think of them as of two similar but far from identical yeasts. K97 in my experiment produced cleaner (less esters, I mean) and slightly tarter beer, while M54 was more estery and noticeably better flocculating. In my experience, they aren't interchangable at all, and I personally prefer M54.

 

[tizoc]

I used M54 only once, found it to be far mor estery than K-97 (which to me is very clean at 16C), and it's krausen didn't look like what I remember K-97's krausen looks like. I didn't like M54 at all.

After a long time of not being able too find it, I recently got some packets of K-97, but I don't plan to use them for now (it is winter here, so it is low-temp-fermented lagers time for me).

Edit:

K97 in my experiment produced cleaner (less esters, I mean) and slightly tarter beer

That is how K97 feels to me, quite clean, and slightly tart (but in a good positive way, not S-04 tart which I hate).

 

[Protos]

I hate S04 tartness (or rather to say, sourness) too. I've found a way to manage it though (after starting a dedicated thread here on HBT). It really helps if you don't ferment your wort with dry or rehydrated yeast but make a starter first. Then S04 performs more like M36: some slight tartness proper to the style and no unpleasant acidity anymore. I found the same is true with some other Fermentis dry yeast (like US05, which, when fermented too cold, sometimes produced excessive tartness to me). Now I never use Fermentis yeasts (T58 aside) without making a starter first.

 

[tizoc]

@Protos do you have a link to that thread? I am interested. (Edit: found it)

Somebody once told me something similar, that after the first generation it started to behave better. But also that when he tried to use a starter, it didn't work, so one had to "sacrifice" a batch to get the "good S-04". What is your starter procedure? do you let it ferment to completion and then cold crash it? or do you pitch it at high krausen? or something else? maybe the method has something to do with it.

(Edit: I see that someone else on that thread made the same comment about the starters not being enough for him, I'm curious about how do you do your starters, it seems to make a difference)

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I hate S04 tartness (or rather to say, sourness) too.

Yeah, I used S-04 for years. Then a buddy at my homebrew club pointed out the slight twang that he got from S-04. After that I always tasted that twang. I moved over to WLP013 as my yeast for my English style beers (mostly Milds and Porters). While I am okay with harvesting and repitching WLP013, I am wanting to move to dry yeasts more to avoid the hassle of making starters and keeping jars of yeast around.

Has anybody done or read about a side by side of a fresh dry pack vs harvested yeast of that strain? I have seen some hints that the drying process impacts the yeast enough that they perform differently on that first pitch, but I have not seen anything conclusive. I have harvested and repitched US-05 and S-04, but never did a direct side by side.

I want to get around to a side by side with WLP013 vs Verdant. I like the idea of stocking packs of Verdant for hazies and English beers.

 

[Protos]

Well, I haven't done a side by side comparison, but in practical terms I can say my previous dry-sprinkled-S04 batches tasted very sour to me (I don't like acidity in any products, perhaps a sort of individual sensibility) - and now I drink my starter-primed-S04 beers with no regrets and no sour reflections whether I should have better flushed it down the gurgler... The beer is slightly tart, of course, but nothing more than the style demands. After propagation, the yeast behaves more like M36, which i like.

Most usually I make smaller batches, 1.5 G (6L) each, so I make propotionately bigger starters: like 1/10th of the whole batch volume. It would be like 2L in a standard 5G batch, I think. I ferment to completion then cold crash my starters. And I pitch it after it has flocculated, never at high Kraeusen. I tried two- and three-stepped starters, but then the acid-lowering effect wasn't as noticeable, it kinda stabilizes after the first step. I noticed a similar effect on K97 and US05, both of which I use extensively. Even BE-134 looses quite a bit of its initial tartness when reused (which is not a good thing, however, as it's a well-balanced yeast and doesn't have any excessive twang in the first place), and to T58 propagation is outwardly detrimental as it robs it of a lot of its zest.

That's my humble experience with propagating Fermentis dry yeasts )

 

[Kold Brygg]

Some interesting information about the origin of Nottingham, Windsor and London. They come from the same source.

Thanks for the feedback and yes Nottingham is a good option for lower temperature fermentations and lager style beers. The only thing to bear in mind is pitching rate, always should increase cell concentration when doing lower temp fermentations and adjusting for that more stressful environment.

I think and assume it just must be the genetic composition of the strain makes it very tolerant to temperature, some strains have very good temperature tolerance and others do not and it related to genetics. There is not a lot to share or reveal about the origins of the strain, which has been in the Lallemand culture collection for about 30 years. My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits. The culture had 4 strains in it and these were isolated in to single strain yeasts. One of these became Nottingham and two of the other strains were Windsor and London (which we also still produce commercially). There was no information about origin or brewery that the multi-strain culture came from. There are always lots of rumours and guesses about where strains come from but most of the time it is not that exciting, it is simply taken from a culture collection with little to no information about the ‘origin’.

Kind regards,

Robert Percival
Regional Sales Manager - Europe
Lallemand Brewing – #WeBrewWithYou

 

[Hanglow]

Interesting that three of their current yeasts came from the same sample from Boots.

 

[kmarkstevens]

In case anyone did figure out the link had the english reply from the Lallemond Regional Sales Manager - Europe on Nottingham origins:

There is not a lot to share or reveal about the origins of the strain, which has been in the Lallemand culture collection for about 30 years. My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits. The culture had 4 strains in it and these were isolated in to single strain yeasts. One of these became Nottingham and two of the other strains were Windsor and London (which we also still produce commercially). There was no information about origin or brewery that the multi-strain culture came from.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Well, I haven't done a side by side comparison, but in practical terms I can say my previous dry-sprinkled-S04 batches tasted very sour to me (I don't like acidity in any products, perhaps a sort of individual sensibility) - and now I drink my starter-primed-S04 beers with no regrets and no sour reflections whether I should have better flushed it down the gurgler... The beer is slightly tart, of course, but nothing more than the style demands. After propagation, the yeast behaves more like M36, which i like.

Most usually I make smaller batches, 1.5 G (6L) each, so I make propotionately bigger starters: like 1/10th of the whole batch volume. It would be like 2L in a standard 5G batch, I think. I ferment to completion then cold crash my starters. And I pitch it after it has flocculated, never at high Kraeusen. I tried two- and three-stepped starters, but then the acid-lowering effect wasn't as noticeable, it kinda stabilizes after the first step. I noticed a similar effect on K97 and US05, both of which I use extensively. Even BE-134 looses quite a bit of its initial tartness when reused (which is not a good thing, however, as it's a well-balanced yeast and doesn't have any excessive twang in the first place), and to T58 propagation is outwardly detrimental as it robs it of a lot of its zest.

That's my humble experience with propagating Fermentis dry yeasts )

Cheers, interesting. I've noticed some changes with dry yeast re-use, but haven't repitched dry yeasts very often. I must do more. How does US-05 change? Cleaner? More like the liquid versions? Presumably K-97 becomes less tart like S-04?

 

[Protos]

How does US-05 change?

I didn't notice other changes than being less tart.
However, in my expericence, warmer fermentation temps seem to be more important, than repitching, in reducing US-05 tartness.
With S-04, it tastes too tart to me whatever temperature it's fermented at, unless it's repitched.

Same with K-97. It's not as tart as S-04 to begin with, still after repitching it looses some of its tartness.
I believe it's something about the drying process at Fermentis. Pitched dry, most of their yeasts have their hallmark tartness and afterwards they become more like their dry counterparts from other brands.
IDK if that's really so, but that's my experience.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I didn't notice other changes than being less tart.
However, in my expericence, warmer fermentation temps seem to be more important, than repitching, in reducing US-05 tartness.
With S-04, it tastes too tart to me whatever temperature it's fermented at, unless it's repitched.

Same with K-97. It's not as tart as S-04 to begin with, still after repitching it looses some of its tartness.
I believe it's something about the drying process at Fermentis. Pitched dry, most of their yeasts have their hallmark tartness and afterwards they become more like their dry counterparts from other brands.
IDK if that's really so, but that's my experience.

I haven't noticed a tartness from US-05, I must admit. I've never used K-97 but intend to. S-04 I've only used 2 or 3 times and not for a long time cos I wasn't keen.

I don't think many if any of the Fermentis strains are from the same sources as Lallemand's. S-33 and Windsor perhaps.

I have found that some dry yeasts on first pitch, like Nottingham, need conditioning time to lose the yeasty flavour that is apparent early on. One to 2 months, I think. Same with M36. And others. Or is it just me?!

 

[Protos]

Yep, Fermentis and Lallemand are surely not from the same source, as both are producers, not resellers, and both have their separate producing plants. It's better to compare Fermentis to Mangrove Jack's rather than to Lallemand, as MJ is a reseller and some of its yeasts are said to be repacked Fermentis, and some repacked Lallemand's. M36, f. ex., is a repacked S-04, M54 - repacked K-97, M15 - S-33 and so on. Dmtaylor's spreadsheet presents all this in details, with references.
However, I'm sure I definitely taste a difference between the original Fermentis yeasts and their repacked Mangrove Jack's versions. Almost all of Fermentis originals, pitched dry, are noticeably tarter than their MJ repacks. I don't know why. And I think MJ's versions are much better, to be honest. I prefer them to Fermentis.

Tartness in my US-05 beers comes irregularly, not every time but sometimes it does. I can't predict it. But I noticed I never get tart beers on US-05 when I repitch and ferment it warmer. So that's what I do now.

I got zero experience with yeasty flavour. Never noticed it. I can easily recall esters, alcohol, fusels, off-flavours in my beers - but nothing like yeasty... Maybe it's the same thing as the "hallmark Fermentis tartness" we are talking about, which I taste clearly while many don't at all.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Yep, Fermentis and Lallemand are surely not from the same source, as both are producers, not resellers, and both have their separate producing plants. It's better to compare Fermentis to Mangrove Jack's rather than to Lallemand, as MJ is a reseller and some of its yeasts are said to be repacked Fermentis, and some repacked Lallemand's. M36, f. ex., is a repacked S-04, M54 - repacked K-97, M15 - S-33 and so on. Dmtaylor's spreadsheet presents all this in details, with references.
However, I'm sure I definitely taste a difference between the original Fermentis yeasts and their repacked Mangrove Jack's versions. Almost all of Fermentis originals, pitched dry, are noticeably tarter than their MJ repacks. I don't know why. And I think MJ's versions are much better, to be honest. I prefer them to Fermentis.

Tartness in my US-05 beers comes irregularly, not every time but sometimes it does. I can't predict it. But I noticed I never get tart beers on US-05 when I repitch and ferment it warmer. So that's what I do now.

I got zero experience with yeasty flavour. Never noticed it. I can easily recall esters, alcohol, fusels, off-flavours in my beers - but nothing like yeasty... Maybe it's the same thing as the "hallmark Fermentis tartness" we are talking about, which I taste clearly while many don't at all.

I have read that Fermentis don't supply any other sellers, and my feeling is that no MJ yeasts are from Fermentis. I believe that MJ use blends in some packs, two strains, or one strain plus enzyme. Just my opinion. I think M36 is more like Notty plus Windsor than S04. M15 probably Windsor. M54 I don't think is K-97. I know Mauribrew is suspected to be a supplier of MJ, so maybe M54 is MB Lager, a sacch strain. M31 has two different colours, so it's obviously a blend of two things.

Just my 2p. (Pence!)

 

[dmtaylor]

MJ has to get some of their yeast from Fermentis because genetic testing proved it. Anything in purple on my sheet is from actual testing. In some cases there are no other possible equivalents.

M31, I know is some blend, so I might be 50-100% wrong on that one.

Overall my aim and hope is that my sheet/chart/table/whatever will be “close enough” about 95% of the time. It will never be 100% perfect. And a large percentage are not true equivalents — Just really closely related sisters or cousins.

I am not selling anything. I am not a geneticist. This is what you get for free. Entertainment value if nothing else.

Enjoy. Cheers.

 

[Protos]

Not just entertainment. An immensly useful tool. You know much better what to expect from your yeasts when you learn their relations between each other.
So, though it's established that some Fermentis and MJ yeasts are genetically identical, there's still a question why their identical yeats are noticeably different flavourwise in the field. It seems, the guys at MJ not just showel the powder into their branded sachets, they must add some secret ingredient to it. And mixing, of course.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

MJ has to get some of their yeast from Fermentis because genetic testing proved it. Anything in purple on my sheet is from actual testing. In some cases there are no other possible equivalents.

M31, I know is some blend, so I might be 50-100% wrong on that one.

Overall my aim and hope is that my sheet/chart/table/whatever will be “close enough” about 95% of the time. It will never be 100% perfect. And a large percentage are not true equivalents — Just really closely related sisters or cousins.

I am not selling anything. I am not a geneticist. This is what you get for free. Entertainment value if nothing else.

Enjoy. Cheers.

Cheers. Can you explain what this testing is that has proven MJ use Fermentis? Thanks.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Some interesting information about the origin of Nottingham, Windsor and London. They come from the same source.

My understanding is that It was originally a multi strain culture given to Lallemand by a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK who ask the company to dry a yeast for insertion in to home brew kits.

By way of full disclosure since Rob's email is being quoted, he was my source when I've mentioned this in the past, eg here. For those outside the UK, "a chain of chemists/pharmacy in the UK" doing homebrew kits in 1990 has to be a reference to Boots, the main pharmacy chain in the UK. They've also dabbled in all sorts of other things over the years, from cameras to kitchen stuff, including being probably the biggest source of homebrew stuff in the UK in the 1980s/90s. They were bought by private equity a few years ago and then sold to Walgreens.

Boots are based in Nottingham and have no particular link to London/Windsor, which perhaps suggests that the multistrain came from a London or Berkshire brewery, or had some kind of royal connection? For instance, Shepherd Neame now have a warrant from Prince Charles, but who knows who had the warrants back in 1990, allegedly Prince Philip was a big fan of Double Diamond back in the day but then switched his loyalty to Boddington.

Boots certainly sold the EDME yeast (similar to S-33/Windsor) at one point, but rather more than 30 years ago. So I speculate that what happened was that EDME tried to screw them on price or there was some other problem, so Boots called their bluff and went to Lallemand saying "We know the EDME yeast originally came from Brewery X, here's a sample of the multi-strain from Brewery X, can you find the one like the EDME strain and make it for us?" But when looking for the equivalent of "Windsor", they found Notty and the better flocculation won out.

 

[dmtaylor]

Cheers. Can you explain what this testing is that has proven MJ use Fermentis? Thanks.

Shoot -- I misspoke. Great question. I am in fact not aware of testing of MJ yeasts. So these are still educated guesses at this point. Sorry about this.

I still believe, however, that MJ does get some of their yeasts from Fermentis. Whether this is a round-about way, or how exactly, I do not know. I don't know whether or how anybody could disprove this theory, as it just makes the most sense in many cases, like for many/most of the Belgians.

Fun stuff to think & argue about though, ain't it!?

Cheers.

 

[duncan_disorderly]

Shoot -- I misspoke. Great question. I am in fact not aware of testing of MJ yeasts. So these are still educated guesses at this point. Sorry about this.

I still believe, however, that MJ does get some of their yeasts from Fermentis. Whether this is a round-about way, or how exactly, I do not know. I don't know whether or how anybody could disprove this theory, as it just makes the most sense in many cases, like for many/most of the Belgians.

Fun stuff to think & argue about though, ain't it!?

Cheers.

No worries. I've used both M36 and S04 and I'm pretty confident they are not the same.

So purple does not mean tested?

I'm just not convinced MJ uses Fermentis, I've found no two the same as yet, but I'm happy to be proven wrong, I just want to learn. Appreciate all attempts and sharing opinions and knowledge.

 

[dmtaylor]

No worries. I've used both M36 and S04 and I'm pretty confident they are not the same.

So purple does not mean tested?

I'm just not convinced MJ uses Fermentis, I've found no two the same as yet, but I'm happy to be proven wrong, I just want to learn. Appreciate all attempts and sharing opinions and knowledge.

Users are better off ignoring the color scheme, purple and so on, they don't mean much of anything anymore. I'll consider getting rid of the colors.

I hope this list encourages people to run more yeast experiments. I split every batch to try different yeasts, and I've been surprised by the results more often than not.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I have read that Fermentis don't supply any other sellers

Hmmm...the Cellar Science offering sure look a lot like the offerings from Fermentis: CellarScience | MoreBeer

I think I have only used their "Cali" yeast and have not done a side by side with US-05. I cannot quite figure out the Cellar Science brand. They seem to be related to, owned, or a brand of More Beer, but my local shop carries them and some other online vendors carry them as well.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I hope this list encourages people to run more yeast experiments. I split every batch to try different yeasts, and I've been surprised by the results more often than not.

I have been picking up a number of 1 gallon fermenters lately and stocking up on dry yeasts. I hope to run a number of yeast trials (mostly for myself as I try to incorporate dry yeast more into my brewing), but will also likely include some Fermentis vs MJ vs Lallemand (maybe with some "equivalent" White Labs and Wyeast in the mix).