Isolated Yeast (Tree House): How to Identify and Characterize?

[beervoid]

I'm usually in the 3oz boil/3oz WP/6oz DH range for a 6 to 6.5% beer. That's my typical strength. I've never been a fan of the thick, sludgy looking beers. This is boarding on it. Grist was 87% 2row/10% carafoam/2% aromatic/1% acid. When I have time, I'll snap a picture so you can see for yourself.

Thanks, im curious cause all the tree house I had where very opaque and hazy

 

[brewpharm Hill]

Along with my previous lengthy post, a few other observations:
1) Nate has spoken a lot about how recipes have evolved and specifically his processes. It’s possible the pictures from 2012 no longer even apply because the process is so vastly different. For example it’s well documented Julius in Monson was less hazy and maltier than now, and Nate has admitted as such.
2) has anyone experimented with adding grains late in mash? All signs point to Julius containing some caramel malt (10 lovibond to keep color from getting too dark?), a carafoam or carapils, and 2-row. I’m not sure how this might affect the fermentability of sugars or efficiency of extraction, but it’s a process I haven’t seen much experimentation with on this thread or others.
3) the fullness and softness of TH beers leads everyone to think mashing high (156-158) is crucial to the mouthfeel, but the attached picture Nate has tweeted (and a video I chose not to attach) show the vorlauf at 152, so there’s a real chance his beers aren’t mashed high and body is from elsewhere. Many experiments have shown mash temp doesn’t change mouthfeel anyway, but Julius still finishes at 1.014-1.015 FG.

Do we know that is from vorlaufing for sure?

 

[brewpharm Hill]

Also, Nate has stated that he doesn't like munich in IPAs. They even did a curiosity beer with it (don't remember which one but it was an earlier one for sure).... Now we know grainbills have changed and all so take it with a grain of salt. I've used munich for color and depth some of my IPAs to a color close to julius and some of them I was not impressed with. It probably depends on the hops and yeast used to get the flavors to meld. Not uncommon for IPAs to have munich though, traditionally. Preferred vienna a little more.

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Do we know that is from vorlaufing for sure?

I say that based on this tweet:



That appears to be a vorlauf as he’s recirculating the wort. The temperature gauge in that video also appears to be at 152* like the picture. Those are 2 different tweets over a week apart and the color of wort is slightly different so it seems to be 2 different beers both mashed at 152. That being said, he could have changed over time to a higher mash.

 

[TBryerton]

Also, Nate has stated that he doesn't like munich in IPAs. They even did a curiosity beer with it (don't remember which one but it was an earlier one for sure).... Now we know grainbills have changed and all so take it with a grain of salt. I've used munich for color and depth some of my IPAs to a color close to julius and some of them I was not impressed with. It probably depends on the hops and yeast used to get the flavors to meld. Not uncommon for IPAs to have munich though, traditionally. Preferred vienna a little more.

Regarding Munich, I’ve read that as well, so who knows. I think whatever he’s using that provides the color is so small it won’t make or break a clone recipe.

I’m not sure if they’re using 1 or more FV’s but whatever contributes that signature flavor is so dominate in some of their beers I struggle to think it can come from adding small amounts of yeast at different times in the process. But I’m far from an expert on that so maybe it is. I’m considering trying a S04 batch, krausenning with an oversized batch of T58 and adding some hops at the same time.

 

[echoALEia]

Not that they use it in their IPAs, but wasn’t a lot Weyermann Munich discovered at their brewery in an earlier post?

 

[beervoid]

I have use a small amount of melanoidin in ipa to get a very distinct fruity flavor. Munich contains melanoidins. My next 2 batches will have a small amount of munich I and II to compare.

 

[NJGeorge]

I’ve been playing with adding a touch of Munich for a while and like the results. We discussed and experimented with that early in this thread as well. Vienna too. I did a pale ale with all Vienna some pale wheat and a touch of Munich 1 with good results. A tad dark but in the sun it’s an awesome orange color. See the pic. For 4.8% beer it has a good full malt mouthfeel and taste. Drinks like a regular IPA. If you can figure out how to get a ton of isoamly acetate from a yeast without clove. You’ll come close to their yeast profile. I think that what we should focus on. How to extract or use a yeast that produces a ton of the overripe banana flavor.

 

[beervoid]

I’ve been playing with adding a touch of Munich for a while and like the results. We discussed and experimented with that early in this thread as well. Vienna too. I did a pale ale with all Vienna some pale wheat and a touch of Munich 1 with good results. A tad dark but in the sun it’s an awesome orange color. See the pic. For 4.8% beer it has a good full malt mouthfeel and taste. Drinks like a regular IPA. If you can figure out how to get a ton of isoamly acetate from a yeast without clove. You’ll come close to their yeast profile. I think that what we should focus on. How to extract or use a yeast that produces a ton of the overripe banana flavor.

Acccording to fermentis data sheets t58 produces the most isoamyl acetate with s04 being a close second. They both are really missing that tropical character that some of the popular neipa yeasts seem to accentuate.

What do you think munich adds?
How much is a touch and which srm are you aiming for?
For me the tree house beers have this nice mid pallet sweetness thats not cloying and balances out the sharp upfront bitterness, possibly making it less lingering?

 

[NJGeorge]

Acccording to fermentis data sheets t58 produces the most isoamyl acetate with s04 being a close second. They both are really missing that tropical character that some of the popular neipa yeasts seem to accentuate.

What do you think munich adds?
How much is a touch and which srm are you aiming for?
For me the tree house beers have this nice mid pallet sweetness thats not cloying and balances out the sharp upfront bitterness, possibly making it less lingering?

I think it adds color, more malt flavor, maybe some sweetness depending on mash temp/yeast. Try it out you’ll see. I add around 3-5% I think. Would have to check notes. 6-7 srm with this batch.

 

[troxerX]

+1 for Munich - this BYO article (below) has some clues and supports both Munich and also Carafoam as well as a thicker, higher temp mash to land a better mouthfeel.

With Nate’s confirmation in 2017 that Treehouse is blending FV’s it should be sufficient to suspect that both ‘same beer’ and ‘different style’ beer blending are part of their strategy. Different style beer blending to produce the beers in the first place and same beer blending for batch to batch consistency. I could see Eureka being a single FV beer whereas all Julius variants and some other complex brews being multiple FVs (separate) styled batches being blended. And it all makes lots of sense - for increasing isoamyl acetate and other desired characteristics, its easier pitch the right yeast in the right wort and conditions to get the best results and then blend that with another batch containing another yeast also designed to maximize other contributions.

This strategy also makes sense at a large scale when it comes to risk management. Instead of putting all ingredients in one large wort, it is less risk to brew separate styled batches and then blend. If one of the individual batches turns out bad, only a portion needs to be discarded and re-brewed instead if having to drain an entire single batch. Furthermore, once all separate FVs are certified good by themselves to be ready for blending, the brewer is in full control of the final blended product as well.

https://byo.com/article/maximizing-mouthfeel-tips-from-the-pros/

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

I’ve been thinking about something interesting: the Julius analysis has shown the ABV to be 7.1% despite being listed as 6.8% on the can. Considering what we know about Nate and how tight his processes have to be, I find this very strange. Now if you consider how much sugar would need to be added for natural carbonation/conditioning, it would add about 0.20-0.30% ABV which could take you from the value from just grain to the value in the can. Based on numerous old pictures of their breweries over the years, they’re absolutely naturally carbonation because blow off pipes/hoses can be see closed while still containing beer, so one of a few processes that could take place are:

1) start with severely underpitched S04, add T58 with 4-5 gravity points remaining, and let finish. Then add CBC-1, sugar, and dry hop while capping FV.

2) attenuate completely with severely underpitched S04. Add T58, sugar, and dry hop while capping FV to carbonate

When to cold crash and such still have to be determined in these, but it would answer a few questions we’ve debated for some time.

 

[beervoid]

So after my blend experiments matured for a couple of weeks, I cant say I was blown away by the flavors. Compared to the Verdant yeast only vs a mix of t58 and s04, I highly preferred the verdant yeast. Not only did it have a much more tropical character it also didnt clear as much up as the other batches did.
Next experiment I will be blending s-33

 

[NJGeorge]

We’re wasting our time with s-04 etc..

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

We’re wasting our time with s-04 etc..

Why do you say that? I think it’s the only yeast that all the DNA tests point towards. Also, many like @couchsending get that signature S04 aroma from TH beers. That being said, there could be some yeast that looks genetically similar I suppose, but it seems highly unlikely.

 

[NJGeorge]

Why do you say that? I think it’s the only yeast that all the DNA tests point towards. Also, many like @couchsending get that signature S04 aroma from TH beers. That being said, there could be some yeast that looks genetically similar I suppose, but it seems highly unlikely.

Have you drank many TH beers?

 

[NJGeorge]

I understand everyone has different tastes. I was drinking a Sap last night from 9/22 and there is no way that the esters from that were mostly S-04. So unique. Unless that house flavor just comes from a certain malt or hop. We’ve all messed with S-04 for some time and no one has really hit the nail on the head. So many brewery’s out there use that yeast and you don’t hear of any other beers resembling TH aroma.

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Have you drank many TH beers?

I’m fortunate to live 35 minutes away, so yes I have. There’s some very green, Julius, haze, and super treat in my fridge now.

I understand everyone has different tastes. I was drinking a Sap last night from 9/22 and there is no way that the esters from that were mostly S-04. So unique. Unless that house flavor just comes from a certain malt or hop. We’ve all messed with S-04 for some time and no one has really hit the nail on the head. So many brewery’s out there use that yeast and you don’t hear of any other beers resembling TH aroma.

I agree we haven’t had perfect results yet but I think that’s got to be process. If we assume all the DNA tests are wrong, what yeast do you think?

 

[NJGeorge]

I’m fortunate to live 35 minutes away, so yes I have. There’s some very green, Julius, haze, and super treat in my fridge now.



I agree we haven’t had perfect results yet but I think that’s got to be process. If we assume all the DNA tests are wrong, what yeast do you think?

Nice! I forgot to mention that Sap has dropped almost clear and still has that TH nose.
Possibly some kind of Belgian yeast that creates that bubblegum ester that a lot of people have been tasting for years. This might be what contributes to their house taste. Not just s04. There are so many Belgian yeasts that none of us have even messed with yet. I’m going to start trying every single one. I'll make a list and post it here. Maybe we can assign each yeast to anyone interested in this thread. Then can even go as far as different pitch rate and temp per member.

Per this, I decided to try a separate ferment of t-58 and iyo citrus (the same strain as 644) and so far it smells amazing. No off phenols like wb06 produces. I’ll dry hop it in a couple of days

Any update on this?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

If we assume all the DNA tests are wrong, what yeast do you think?

Wasn't there a thought at some point that they might have changed yeast around the time of the move (or earlier?). We shouldn't regard these things as fixed forever, and it's certainly pretty normal for small breweries to take the easy route and buy in dry yeast in their early years, then when they have room/cash for a lab and yeast propagation, they bring most of their yeast work inhouse.

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Wasn't there a thought at some point that they might have changed yeast around the time of the move (or earlier?). We shouldn't regard these things as fixed forever, and it's certainly pretty normal for small breweries to take the easy route and buy in dry yeast in their early years, then when they have room/cash for a lab and yeast propagation, they bring most of their yeast work inhouse.

That’s true, but the cans tested this year confirm S04 right @Clyde McCoy ?

 

[TBryerton]

Nice! I forgot to mention that Sap has dropped almost clear and still has that TH nose.
Possibly some kind of Belgian yeast that creates that bubblegum ester that a lot of people have been tasting for years. This might be what contributes to their house taste. Not just s04. There are so many Belgian yeasts that none of us have even messed with yet. I’m going to start trying every single one. I'll make a list and post it here. Maybe we can assign each yeast to anyone interested in this thread. Then can even go as far as different pitch rate and temp per member.

Any update on this?

I never considered Sap to have the signature TH flavor and thought it was an average IPA. More recently I’ve noticed it clearly has some of that TH flavor, and in my opinion, is a much better beer. I would agree that the majority of that specific flavor is not coming from S04, but I’m still under the impression that’s it’s the ‘base’ yeast in their core beers.

I think one of the clues we need to focus on is that the ‘house’ flavor is always the same. If it’s purely yeast driven, I could see a different yeast being added with sugar late in the process. If it’s dependent on hops, and some form of bio transformation, I have to think there’s another vessel involved - maybe just kraussening. Otherwise you’re going to get different flavors from a Citra heavy beer to Galaxy heavy beer for example.

 

[suregork]

As Northern Brewer says, and I mentioned a few pages back, do we know for sure they use dry yeasts? If yes, then one can be quite confident the 'S04-like' isolate is S04, as I'm not sure there are that many other Beer 1 - UK dried strains. If liquid yeasts are an option, you'll see that most Beer 1 - UK strains will produce very similar interdelta fingerprints (see page 96 for some high resolution examples), especially if run on agarose gels.

 

[NJGeorge]

As Northern Brewer says, and I mentioned a few pages back, do we know for sure they use dry yeasts? If yes, then one can be quite confident the 'S04-like' isolate is S04, as I'm not sure there are that many other Beer 1 - UK dried strains. If liquid yeasts are an option, you'll see that most Beer 1 - UK strains will produce very similar interdelta fingerprints (see page 96 for some high resolution examples), especially if run on agarose gels.

Yes! I agree with your post on page 96. Might not even be s04 even tho it might look like it on the DNA tests. We should ferment with those other suggested yeasts. Here some yeast to try:
WLP570
WLP644
WLP540
WLP500
WLP400
WLP028 - Melon and pear esters?
Dennys Favorite – for malt and mouth feel?
Also, as @echoALEia has mentioned, maybe over pitch t-58/wb-04. I haven’t tried this.
Who wants to start?

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Yes! I agree with your post on page 96. Might not even be s04 even tho it might look like it on the DNA tests. We should ferment with those other suggested yeasts. Here some yeast to try:
WLP570
WLP644
WLP540
WLP500
WLP400
WLP028 - Melon and pear esters?
Dennys Favorite – for malt and mouth feel?
Also, as @echoALEia has mentioned, maybe over pitch t-58/wb-04. I haven’t tried this.
Who wants to start?

But are we just throwing out the theory that Nate introduced underpitched S04 to Toppling Goliath?

 

[NJGeorge]

But are we just throwing out the theory that Nate introduced underpitched S04 to Toppling Goliath?

Even so, that was 2014 and no TG beer tastes anything like TH. A lot has changed since then I'm sure. Even if they had their house flavor (yeast) back then, you think Nate was gonna give away his secret to another brewery?

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Even so, that was 2014 and no TG beer tastes anything like TH. A lot has changed since then I'm sure. Even if they had their house flavor (yeast) back then, you think Nate was gonna give away his secret to another brewery?

Great point. I’ve tried to see what other yeasts are similar on the genetic tree to S04, T58, and WB06 and have been tested in this thread, but I’m having trouble finding the list. @isomerization and @Clyde McCoy do you happen to have lists of other yeasts that you’ve tested? You both have been the all stars in this yeast search.

*Edit* post #3325 has all of @isomerization tested yeasts, but he has admitted some may have been contaminated, including WLP644. I still don’t know of any others @Clyde McCoy has tested or if there’s a database we (as in anyone) can access to check the TH yeasts against.

 

[echoALEia]

Nice! I forgot to mention that Sap has dropped almost clear and still has that TH nose.
Possibly some kind of Belgian yeast that creates that bubblegum ester that a lot of people have been tasting for years. This might be what contributes to their house taste. Not just s04. There are so many Belgian yeasts that none of us have even messed with yet. I’m going to start trying every single one. I'll make a list and post it here. Maybe we can assign each yeast to anyone interested in this thread. Then can even go as far as different pitch rate and temp per member.

Any update on this?

To make a long story short - more testing needs to be done. The aroma from the keg was amazing. When I blended it into the main batch it wasn’t bad, but not signature treehouse. The main batch may be the problem though with that, because it was a repitch of the farmhouse NEIPA blend and s-33.

Concerning more wb06/t58, and s04 (underpitched), I think more testing needs to be done as well. I had fusels in it but I didn’t control the temp. When I added it to my main underpitched s04 batch it was wonderful in terms of aroma and haze - it really maintained the hop aroma. Flavor is fine.

So more testing on my end. I think there might be something to wlp644/iyo citrus if they are the same strain.

 

[Lakeside_Brewer5]

Most people here have seen this, but figured I’d post it anyway. It’s the yeast genome tree many reference.

http://beer.suregork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Brewing_yeast_tree_Oct_2019.pdf
The closest yeasts to S04 on that tree have never been tested in this thread, so perhaps one of them looks the same genetically but with slightly different characteristics. T58, however, doesn’t have any real close relatives, so that old can of very green it “took over” from 2019 that was tested in 2020 seems like it would actually be T58. I also don’t think there’s anything stopping them from using multiple brands of yeast, so WLP644 is interesting. WLP540 is POF+ but we know treehouse dregs have given us clove in the past anyway.

Also, here’s 2 old blog posts on Treehouse by people back in 2014. I’ve poured over the Brewbokeh one and you can see what beers are in each fermenter, the date they were brewed, and you can see based on the butterfly valves that the fermenter with Sap was capped and no longer allowed gas to escape by day 7. This guy was at TH on May 9, 2014, based on an Instagram post of his.

http://brewbokeh.com/place-treehouse.html
https://www.goodbeerhunting.com/blo...finds-fertile-ground-in-western-masachussetts

 

[TBryerton]

We know they insisted on underpitching s04 on the TG collab, I believe it’s known they use us05 in their bright beers, it’s been said people have seen them pitching bricks of dry yeast, people have said Nate used dry yeast in his homebrew days, multiple dna tests show s04 like results, their core beers have characteristics of s04...everything points to s04 doing the heavy lifting. Nothing points against. So why would we conclude they aren’t using s04???