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

[Northern_Brewer]

I thought WLP095 was yeast from Magic Hat.

Magic Hat are a (yet another) Pugsley brewery, so they certainly used to brew with Ringwood.

 

[melville]

Everything I've read has pointed to 095 being a Conan, yours is the first suggestion I've ever seen of it being a 1318 equivalent. The PCRs at the start of this thread suggest WLP4000 is quite similar to 1968 "Fuller's", which rather suggests that 095 and 4000 are the Beer090/099 in the Gallone paper that are closely related to Fuller's/Whitbread B. The numbering would make sense as well, as they would have arrived on the market after the main bulk of sequencing was done for that paper, but would have been of high interest (and we know they did another company's version of WLP001 just out of curiosity). They seem to be aiming London Fog at the 1318 market as they didn't have an exact equivalent.

Would be easy enough to do a PCR though, if someone can bring 095 and a PCR machine together... (as it happens I have 4000 but not 095)

I seem to remember the guy from The Yeast Bay chiming in at some point that 095 wasn't Conan. Magic Hat being in Burlington makes more sense than the Alchemist which isn't in Burlington.

 

[melville]

The beer I made with Conan in the blend vs S-04 turned out nicely — though not really sure if I can detect what t-58 and wb-06 are bringing (ratios with liquid are hard). That said there isn't anything so special here that I wouldn't continue using S-04, especially given the convenience. One thing I did here was to half crash on day 5 and then transfer to a keg with the final dry hop and 15g of sugar, let that sit at 65f for 3 days, then put in the fridge, and began force carbing/conditioning for another 10 days. Seems like that may help with O2 and pop the hops a bit more (could also be the Conan popping the hops more). 70% Galaxy, 15% Amarillo, 10% Chinook.

Back to the normal blend for the beer brewed this past weekend. 70% Mosaic, 15% Citra, 10% Amarillo. Didn't put any Mosaic in the boil to see if that prevents the garlic/onion/basement thing it gets. Oh, also whirlfoc'd this one for science.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

I seem to remember the guy from The Yeast Bay chiming in at some point that 095 wasn't Conan.

There's no doubt that 095 is not the same as the Yeast Bay's WLP4000, 095 is a bit more restrained. But that doesn't mean that it's not a Conan.

There's no One True Conan, there's a family of related mutants in the same way that WLP001 and 1056 and eg Pacman are very closely related but different. 095 and 4000 would have been obvious targets for the White Labs genome sequencing project, and if they're the ones I think they are, then their genomes are as closely related as WLP001 and 1056.

 

[sag1189]

I seem to remember the guy from The Yeast Bay chiming in at some point that 095 wasn't Conan. Magic Hat being in Burlington makes more sense than the Alchemist which isn't in Burlington.

Conan originates (in the States) with Greg Noonan at Vermont Pub and Brewery in Burlington.

 

[melville]

There's no doubt that 095 is not the same as the Yeast Bay's WLP4000, 095 is a bit more restrained. But that doesn't mean that it's not a Conan.

There's no One True Conan, there's a family of related mutants in the same way that WLP001 and 1056 and eg Pacman are very closely related but different. 095 and 4000 would have been obvious targets for the White Labs genome sequencing project, and if they're the ones I think they are, then their genomes are as closely related as WLP001 and 1056.

Was Conan a Ringwood mutation? Magic Hat uses Ringwood. So in that sense when Whute Labs "this is the closest thing to use for Heady clone" perhaps it's accurate.

(Though I will say after much forum and comments reading this morning it does seem like it is Conan)

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Was Conan a Ringwood mutation? Magic Hat uses Ringwood.

Not that I have any evidence for. There seems to be a theory going round the internet that says that Conan is the other half of the Ringwood multistrain to the NCYC1187 that's sold to homebrewers as Ringwood. But that seems to be solely on the basis that Conan's original designation was VPB-1188 and hence must be NCYC1188. A more convincing theory says that VPB-1188 might have something to do with the Vermont Pub & Bar opening in November 1988 and has nothing to do with Ringwood.

As I say, the genetic evidence we have is limited and far from conclusive, but does seem to point to Conan being a relative of the Fuller's/Whitbread B group, which are something of a distinct sub-family of the UK yeasts. Ringwood sits in the middle of the main group and so is distantly related in comparison.

It is plausible that Greg Noonan would have originally made a selection from either Fuller's or Whitbread B if he was scouting for a British yeast in the 1980s. Fuller's were the hot brewery at the time, they won Champion Beer of Britain 5 years out of 10 or something like that, whereas Whitbread B became the most important yeast in Britain because it worked so well in the new wave of industrial breweries. Fuller's started moving to cylindroconicals in about 1978 and went from multistrain to single strain for the new fermenters; I'm not quite sure when they got rid of their last open fermenter but it's possible Noonan snagged another member of the multistrain to the one we know today as 1968/WLP002.

 

[couchsending]

Ringwood is WLP005

The specs for WLP095 are a lot closer to Conan than Ringwood in terms of Flocculation, attenuation, etc.

 

[Jwin]

Conan originates (in the States) with Greg Noonan at Vermont Pub and Brewery in Burlington.

That he brought from the UK where he learned to brew iirc. Kimmich said something of the sort at a conference speech I watched on YouTube a few months ago.
Edit:
Was a little off
Greg found it while drinking beers in England
@38:45

 

[Northern_Brewer]

A change of subject. About 5 months ago I made a SMaSHish pale with some bittering and ~6g/l (ie SNPA kind of level) of some Chinook and a bit of old Amarillo I had hanging around. Split it fourways, fermented with Mangrove Jack M36 Liberty Bell, T-58, WB-06 and a blend of a slug of M36 and a pinch of the other two. Original idea was just to get to know the different yeasts whilst tidying up the freezer a bit.

They were OK at the time, not my greatest efforts, but OK. Recently tried some bottles that I kept back and the results were pretty startling - you wouldn't have guessed any of them were the same beer.

M36 - had the classic punchy grapefruit and a bit of pine you'd expect.
WB-06 - lost all the fruit, got that wheat beer thing going on, with maybe a hint of Bramley apple.
T-58 - starts to get interesting, modest fruit but definitely more lime than grapefruit
Blend - most of the fruit gone, but what there is a wonderful complex mix, delicate lemony with some lime and mandarin. Amp that up 5 times and you'd have an absolutely lovely beer.

So this looks like a clear case of biotransformation centred around the T-58, but something happens with the blend, and I'm not sure that WB-06 is helping much. I'd really like to see what happens with more Chinook in a M36/T-58 blend.

I know THH has mentioned Chinook biotransformation in the past, but I'm not sure there's been much discussion of what the putative Julius yeast blend might do to hop flavours.

 

[NJGeorge]

So I wanted to post a couple of observations I made in regards to EQ yeast. Posting this because I found their beer to have similarities to TH. Made a starter with yeast from the bottom of a can of Fluctuation and noted wheat or hefe smell/taste (almost reminded me of blue moon).
I have yeast from a can of Fractle in a starter right now and I’m getting lots banana maybe slight bubblegum but also that wheat/hefe smell. Slight fruit maybe peach as well? Smells good. Room temp is 72.

 

[couchsending]

Double post

 

[The_Dirty_Spring]

Hey crew, I stumbled into this old ProBrewer message board which you may find interesting...perhaps a point of inspiration for TH Nate. Posted in 2010:

"T58 - hefty belgian strain. very very belgian. Hard to floc out. I found best used in blend with a low ester english/US ale strain. 70/30 80/20 - low end for t58. Start warm and ramp down to get nice "belgian" notes. Made an english hopped IPA, with this - it was just tooooo much. I wished I had just used a %'ge of that strain, rather. It took ages to lose a really heavy nose, and mellow down to a sound belgian note."

http://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-3458.html

 

[TheHairyHop]

in that thread, someone mentions getting tart fruit flavors when oxygenating US-05. They claim that the flavor goes away without oxygenating the first pitch. I would say that this sounds perfect for my S-04 problems, but I just keg conditioned with it, so I don't see how that would help unfortunately My hunch is that maybe T-58 and WB-06 are truly doing something special, but if they are, I doubt S-04 is providing much other than a mainly neutral canvas. Therefore, I'll probably just continue to use 1318 as a base and fiddle with that

 

[melville]

Took a hydro pull this morning of the mosaic beer I mentioned with a 81|15|4 blend — comical orange levels, and just a hint of twang to clue into possible English origin, something definitely not present in the Conan blend which is very clean in comparison. Also of note, on day 4 the beer is essentially at FG and things are cleaning up.

edit: also no off-putting mosaic notes, which tells me keeping mosaic out of the boil may help in that regard.

also: whirlfloc'd and don't notice a difference in appearance other than a cleaner trub/yeast layer.

(the conan beer looked real ugly before cold crashing)

 

[melville]

Hey crew, I stumbled into this old ProBrewer message board which you may find interesting...perhaps a point of inspiration for TH Nate. Posted in 2010:

"T58 - hefty belgian strain. very very belgian. Hard to floc out. I found best used in blend with a low ester english/US ale strain. 70/30 80/20 - low end for t58. Start warm and ramp down to get nice "belgian" notes. Made an english hopped IPA, with this - it was just tooooo much. I wished I had just used a %'ge of that strain, rather. It took ages to lose a really heavy nose, and mellow down to a sound belgian note."

http://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-3458.html

Nice find!

 

[TheHairyHop]

Took a hydro pull this morning of the mosaic beer I mentioned with a 81|15|4 blend — comical orange levels, and just a hint of twang to clue into possible English origin, something definitely not present in the Conan blend which is very clean in comparison. Also of note, on day 4 the beer is essentially at FG and things are cleaning up.

edit: also no off-putting mosaic notes, which tells me keeping mosaic out of the boil may help in that regard.

also: whirlfloc'd and don't notice a difference in appearance other than a cleaner trub/yeast layer.

(the conan beer looked real ugly before cold crashing)

be sure to report on the ultimate mouthfeel

 

[Northern_Brewer]

in that thread, someone mentions getting tart fruit flavors when oxygenating US-05. They claim that the flavor goes away without oxygenating the first pitch. I would say that this sounds perfect for my S-04 problems, but I just keg conditioned with it, so I don't see how that would help unfortunately My hunch is that maybe T-58 and WB-06 are truly doing something special, but if they are, I doubt S-04 is providing much other than a mainly neutral canvas. Therefore, I'll probably just continue to use 1318 as a base and fiddle with that

I think you need the British yeast to be doing the heavy lifting of fermenting, if you have enough of the Belgians to do the fermenting then they end up just munching all the hops as well. Well, certainly the WB-06 had munched almost all the hop flavour after 5 months, whereas the T-58 had started doing interesting things to it. I've mentioned before that I think the DNA evidence for WB-06 is kinda weak, and apart from it doing its wheat-beery thing I'm not sure it's doing the hops any favours. I need a repeat with just M36+T-58, see whether that can get this amazing complexity of citrus flavours without the WB-06.

 

[couchsending]

I remember hearing somewhere that Mitch Steele thought certain Belgian yeasts had the ability to react with hops in different way as compared to traditional ale yeasts, and it was in a positive way. He was referring to a Belgian IPA that Stone had released and how well it aged and changed with age.

The WB-06 could potentially be used to enhance haze stability... seems random but it’s incredibly powdery yet when in suspension doesn’t seem to have a negative affect on flavor.

 

[ThePaleAleIndian]

My split/blended batch was about 15-20% WB-06, i.e. that portion of the finished blend came from a 100% WB-06 beer. The blend definitely had the subtle banana-bubblegum character that many seem to perceive in TH, but not as strong. Trying the WB-06 batch by itself, it had a lot of banana-bubblegum and almost no clove. In contrast, my first attempt with the blend was about 6% WB-06 co-pitched, and that one was chock full of clove. So the 100% WB-06 batch having no clove I think was a function of how I treated the yeast (warm pitch/ferment, underpitch). My feeling is that the WB-06 is contributing to the overall flavor in TH. In fact, I plan on continuing to experiment with blending and increasing the proportion of the 100% WB-06 part of the blend.

@isomerization said the images are difficult to read but he stands by the WB-06 analysis...

 

[NJGeorge]

My split/blended batch was about 15-20% WB-06, i.e. that portion of the finished blend came from a 100% WB-06 beer. The blend definitely had the subtle banana-bubblegum character that many seem to perceive in TH, but not as strong. Trying the WB-06 batch by itself, it had a lot of banana-bubblegum and almost no clove. In contrast, my first attempt with the blend was about 6% WB-06 co-pitched, and that one was chock full of clove. So the 100% WB-06 batch having no clove I think was a function of how I treated the yeast (warm pitch/ferment, underpitch). My feeling is that the WB-06 is contributing to the overall flavor in TH. In fact, I plan on continuing to experiment with blending and increasing the proportion of the 100% WB-06 part of the blend.

@isomerization said the images are difficult to read but he stands by the WB-06 analysis...

On my next attempt I might try a 50/50 batch half being wb-06. Same grain same hops for each one, then blend in the keg with some more dry hops for a couple days and force carb. Wonder how a 100% wb batch would be like?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

My feeling is that the WB-06 is contributing to the overall flavor in TH. In fact, I plan on continuing to experiment with blending and increasing the proportion of the 100% WB-06 part of the blend.

That's cool. I'm looking at this more from a technical point of view for my own beers rather than literally cloning Julius, as I'm unlikely to ever have the chance to drink it. So I'm less interested in crossing the t's on an exact clone. If I can get 90% of the interest from 67% of the complexity, then that works for me.

isomerization said the images are difficult to read but he stands by the WB-06 analysis...

Well I don't think it was that clearcut, but having spent several years looking at these kinds of gels in another life - I woudn't say anything definite without a fresh gel, but I tend to the view that it could be WB-06, but is more likely to be a cousin. But people in glass houses and all that, I'm still very grateful to isomerization for taking the time to do the gels in the first place!

 

[isomerization]

That's cool. I'm looking at this more from a technical point of view for my own beers rather than literally cloning Julius, as I'm unlikely to ever have the chance to drink it. So I'm less interested in crossing the t's on an exact clone. If I can get 90% of the interest from 67% of the complexity, then that works for me.



Well I don't think it was that clearcut, but having spent several years looking at these kinds of gels in another life - I woudn't say anything definite without a fresh gel, but I tend to the view that it could be WB-06, but is more likely to be a cousin. But people in glass houses and all that, I'm still very grateful to isomerization for taking the time to do the gels in the first place!

None of the gels are that great, but that’s what you get when you’re making do with hand me down stuffs on the side

I think the other 3 yeasts are more clear cut in their “identification” and the WB-06 call arises out of a similar banding pattern and the Fermentis commonality. If the other strains are correct, why would TH use a different supplier for the 3rd one (certainly possible though).

 

[Northern_Brewer]

None of the gels are that great, but that’s what you get when you’re making do with hand me down stuffs on the side

I think the other 3 yeasts are more clear cut in their “identification” and the WB-06 call arises out of a similar banding pattern and the Fermentis commonality. If the other strains are correct, why would TH use a different supplier for the 3rd one (certainly possible though).

I'm sorry, I didn't quite get round to addressing this last time. And I certainly don't want to be the one to throw the first stone when I've had plenty of worse gels run for the day job!

I think my main worry is Windsor versus ESB. Clearly Lallemand think they're different enough to market as separate yeasts, and I've never really heard them talked about as being close relatives - but they also seem to differ by just one small band, around 100bp. So that's why I get twitchy about the 240bp band that seems to be missing from the gold star but present in WB-06. It could be Be-256 or Be-134 - or F-2 and in fact it's the red square yeast that's the "wheat beer" yeast that brewing evidence suggests is present....

But whilst it would be convenient to get everything from Fermentis, and things like Be-256 and Be-134 might be worth testing, in principle there's nothing to say that they wouldn't use say Munich Classic if that's what worked for them? We're not exactly talking some weird kveik or something, these are things that are generally available.

 

[isomerization]

I did test BE-256 btw: Isolated Yeast (Tree House): How to Identify and Characterize?

Didn’t have BE-134 at the time, but have plans to use it in a hoppy saison soon. Regardless, you are welcome to disprove the current hypotheses with your own data.

 

[ThePaleAleIndian]

On my next attempt I might try a 50/50 batch half being wb-06. Same grain same hops for each one, then blend in the keg with some more dry hops for a couple days and force carb. Wonder how a 100% wb batch would be like?

I would be really interested to know how a 50/50 blend works out! I wonder if that's the direction I'm going too, although I don't think I'm ready for 50/50 just yet.

Are you worried about oxidation at all with force carbing a blend? I naturally carbed mine with loose keg hops (with a dip tube filter) and was pretty happy with the hop saturation, also didn't show any oxidation damage over the life of the keg. Of course, I may never know if I needed to be as careful as I was.

I think the German wheat strains in general tend to be quite sensitive to pitch rate and pitch/ferment temp. The Brulosophy guys did a good xBmt on this with the White Labs Weihenstephaner strain. A 100% WB-06 batch could have vastly varying character depending on how you manipulate those parameters. With my blend, I pitched the 100% WB-06 batch at 77F and left it in a steady 78F ish ambient area, insulated with a towel and some aluminum foil. So it got pretty freaking warm. Also pitched only 0.35g yeast to about 3.5 quarts of wort. There was basically no clove doing it that way, and no fusels, which I had worried about with those temps. @marshallb had mentioned good results with just a Wyeast Bavarian wheat strain I think.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Ah, missed that one, thanks.

Hopefully there should be some more data by the summer...

As an aside, @loveofrose reckons that mead made with CBC-1 is indistinguishable from mead made with ICV D21, a POF+ red wine K2 killer yeast from Pic St Loup. Which is plausible, you'd expect them to be using wine yeasts as conditioning yeasts, but if correct it would be another potential source of phenolics, although Lallemand says CBC-1 does not contribute flavour....

Again, I might be able to do some work on that, I have CBC-1 and have ferulic acid on order...

 

[RevKev]

I think some of you folks could find this interesting.. Just saw it and said. Hmf. Neato. Genomic reconstruction directly relating into the metabolome.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/...tml?rref=collection/sectioncollection/science

 

[NJGeorge]

I would be really interested to know how a 50/50 blend works out! I wonder if that's the direction I'm going too, although I don't think I'm ready for 50/50 just yet.

Are you worried about oxidation at all with force carbing a blend? I naturally carbed mine with loose keg hops (with a dip tube filter) and was pretty happy with the hop saturation, also didn't show any oxidation damage over the life of the keg. Of course, I may never know if I needed to be as careful as I was.

I think the German wheat strains in general tend to be quite sensitive to pitch rate and pitch/ferment temp. The Brulosophy guys did a good xBmt on this with the White Labs Weihenstephaner strain. A 100% WB-06 batch could have vastly varying character depending on how you manipulate those parameters. With my blend, I pitched the 100% WB-06 batch at 77F and left it in a steady 78F ish ambient area, insulated with a towel and some aluminum foil. So it got pretty freaking warm. Also pitched only 0.35g yeast to about 3.5 quarts of wort. There was basically no clove doing it that way, and no fusels, which I had worried about with those temps. @marshallb had mentioned good results with just a Wyeast Bavarian wheat strain I think.

Nah I’m not worried about oxidation with force carbing. Why should I be if the transfer process is done well? Maybe after the transfer I’ll let the keg sit for a day or two with some CBC. Or natural carb, ahh so many options! Well see...

 

[isomerization]

Ah, missed that one, thanks.

Hopefully there should be some more data by the summer...

As an aside, @loveofrose reckons that mead made with CBC-1 is indistinguishable from mead made with ICV D21, a POF+ red wine K2 killer yeast from Pic St Loup. Which is plausible, you'd expect them to be using wine yeasts as conditioning yeasts, but if correct it would be another potential source of phenolics, although Lallemand says CBC-1 does not contribute flavour....

Again, I might be able to do some work on that, I have CBC-1 and have ferulic acid on order...

Very interesting, could this be the reason that a lot of cultures made from TH dregs end up very Belgiany (CBC-1 outcompetes other yeasts and generates phenolics)? I don’t have sources to cite, but I feel like I’ve read that a lot, never done it myself.

 

[isomerization]

I think some of you folks could find this interesting.. Just saw it and said. Hmf. Neato. Genomic reconstruction directly relating into the metabolome.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/science/craft-beer-hops.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/science

I posted a link to the article on the General Discussion board, but some guy in there just wanted to talk about GMOs...

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Very interesting, could this be the reason that a lot of cultures made from TH dregs end up very Belgiany (CBC-1 outcompetes other yeasts and generates phenolics)?

Not just TH dregs, it's a common thing when people end up harvesting bottling yeasts. I know it's fairly normal for wine/champagne yeasts to be used as conditioning yeasts - they're part of the less-domesticated group of "seasonal" yeasts that includes most saison yeasts. Domestication generally involves losing phenolics and gaining the ability to munch maltotriose. So most (but not all) of the seasonal yeasts are POF+, I don't know how that works in bottling. Maybe the substrate has all been broken down into other things, or the cinnamate decarboxylase only really gets transcribed in certain environments?? I don't really know wine yeast well.

Well it couldn't have been me talking about GMOs, I'm old-school enough to insist on calling them transgenics. Pretty much anything that's not been cloned is a GMO, genetic modification is kinda the whole point of sex...

It's cool science, I wonder if the best place for it might be a bioreactor producing cheap terpenols that get added to mass-market beer along with a smaller amount of hops. People seem comfortable with the idea of hop extracts, and with stuff like lecithin from transgenic soybeans, and it would get round the problems people have with direct consumption of transgenics.

 

[NJGeorge]

Hey crew, I stumbled into this old ProBrewer message board which you may find interesting...perhaps a point of inspiration for TH Nate. Posted in 2010:

"T58 - hefty belgian strain. very very belgian. Hard to floc out. I found best used in blend with a low ester english/US ale strain. 70/30 80/20 - low end for t58. Start warm and ramp down to get nice "belgian" notes. Made an english hopped IPA, with this - it was just tooooo much. I wished I had just used a %'ge of that strain, rather. It took ages to lose a really heavy nose, and mellow down to a sound belgian note."

http://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-3458.html

Thanks for posting this. The thread in that link has a lot of interesting info that could have been ideas for creating TH as you said. There’s mention of wb pitch at 60% fermented warm to produce banana and a lot of people praising s04. Also wb used exclusively for a white ipa and talk of t58 used for conditioning. So many options to try out.

 

[stonebrewer]

Drinking a Julius now canned yesterday. Oh my this is good. Here are my impressions...

It is as good as I ever remember it to be. I don't think there is a drop off from when I first had it in the original brewery, where I had it from a growler...in fact I think this is better. It is VERY soft on the palate, and I think it is more opaque than that first growler I had a few years back. Aroma is a bit subdued, which checks with my memory of the original I had. VERY hoppy, in a great way. Flavor is off the charts good, which is a bit odd when you consider the aroma. Usually, a beer this tasty is also extremely aromatic. This has a good aroma, but it is more subtle than other great NEIPAs I have had and a bit more yeasty smelling, I dare say. I find myself hesitating to drink it, because I know it will be gone way too soon...yes there are more in the fridge, but this must, must, must be savored (cuz I get up that way only a few times a year!). There is a bit of hop bite, but not in a bad way and not like some of my own NEIPA homebrews...it is in the throat, and really subtle. As it warms, the aroma gets a bit stronger and the taste gets more complex. This is a fine beer and I am glad I cannot get a case any time I want it...that might grow into a real problem...grin!! Sap, Catharsis, Lights On, and Haze are on deck as well. If you need me to grow up some cells from any of these, let me know and I will be happy to.

Bottom line for me is Julius does not appear to have dropped off at the new facility, based on sample of one of the most recent batch. Hope that is true for the others as I am a big fan of Sap, Haze, and Green (which I do not currently have).

 

[robopp]

Batch to batch variations seem to be a big issue at TH right now. Glad you got one of the good batches. I bought a case of Julius a month ago and it was very subdued in flavor and aroma and had this horrible hop burn at the end of the can. I regretted buying a whole case.

 

[melville]

Had my first pour of the mosaic beer in where I used whirlfloc in the boil. Despite a 25% oat malt | 10% flaked wheat contribution beer is notably less hazy than usual. There is definitely haze there, but no murky/milky quality. Beer definitely tastes cleaner and brighter, like it seems more vivid, but does feel a bit thinner and looks a tad darker than it should — I assume because some of the particles that might normally reflect light aren't there. Oddly it seems to drink softer. So, some definite upsides and some downsides, overall though really good and on balance I mostly want what whirlfloc is doing here. (note: per @treehousenate — recommends kettle finings).

For reference used a half tab for a 3.5 gallon batch. Maybe a quarter tab?

 

[jakturner]

I recently brewed a Gose with danstar's Munich classic that had a strong fruity character. I brought it to a gathering and the people there were trying to guess what fruit I added to it (there was no fruit added) the descriptors I got the most was peach/apricot and juicy fruit gum, a few said banana, melon, and generic tropical fruit, no clove/spice at all. It finished at 1.012 and had a slightly sweet finish. Any who, this week I'm going to try it in NEIPA, I think it would work quite well. The only problem that I see is trying to nail that yeast profile again, I sprinkled an expired pack (got a bunch for free from LHBS) into 3.4 pH wort and fermented in a leaky bucket with no airlock for the first 3 days. So it might not turn out the same if fermented under less stress (from low pH) and I don't think I would open ferment a NEIPA for fear of oxidation. I don't have much experience with Hefe yeast so any feed back is appreciated. On a side note, this yeast took off faster than any dried yeast I've ever used and the krausen was about 10 inches tall.

 

[Sawhorse-Josh]

is this a new description of Bright?

BRIGHT w/Simcoe & Amarillo (Double IPA 7.8% ABV) - This rendition of Bright was created to be a clean and elegant showcase for a pair of our favorite American hops - Simcoe & Amarillo! It is crafted with a simple malt bill and fermented with clean American Ale yeast to create a flavor profile that is more a function of its vibrant fresh ingredients than an expression of yeast character. Bright w/Simcoe & Amarillo’s aroma is a bounty of passionfruit, citrus, and pine. The taste follows suit with notes of clementine, grapefruit, and sticky hops with a gentle hint of orange rind in the finish. She is dry, soft, and adequately bittered resulting in a very approachable Double IPA.. classic and delicious! We love the Bright series for its individualism as it allows the pure character of the hop to shine, foregoing the hop compound biotransformation that contributes depth, complexity, and originality to our core Tree House IPA’s. With this beer you get pure Simcoe & Amarillo hop candy, and what a sweet treat it is!

 

[ThePaleAleIndian]

is this a new description of Bright?

BRIGHT w/Simcoe & Amarillo (Double IPA 7.8% ABV) - This rendition of Bright was created to be a clean and elegant showcase for a pair of our favorite American hops - Simcoe & Amarillo! It is crafted with a simple malt bill and fermented with clean American Ale yeast to create a flavor profile that is more a function of its vibrant fresh ingredients than an expression of yeast character. Bright w/Simcoe & Amarillo’s aroma is a bounty of passionfruit, citrus, and pine. The taste follows suit with notes of clementine, grapefruit, and sticky hops with a gentle hint of orange rind in the finish. She is dry, soft, and adequately bittered resulting in a very approachable Double IPA.. classic and delicious! We love the Bright series for its individualism as it allows the pure character of the hop to shine, foregoing the hop compound biotransformation that contributes depth, complexity, and originality to our core Tree House IPA’s. With this beer you get pure Simcoe & Amarillo hop candy, and what a sweet treat it is!

Whoa, yeah, never seen an explicit mention of biotransformation hops on the TH on tap page before. Nice find!

 

[MaCheFai]

I recently brewed a Gose with danstar's Munich classic that had a strong fruity character. I brought it to a gathering and the people there were trying to guess what fruit I added to it (there was no fruit added) the descriptors I got the most was peach/apricot and juicy fruit gum, a few said banana, melon, and generic tropical fruit, no clove/spice at all. It finished at 1.012 and had a slightly sweet finish. Any who, this week I'm going to try it in NEIPA, I think it would work quite well. The only problem that I see is trying to nail that yeast profile again, I sprinkled an expired pack (got a bunch for free from LHBS) into 3.4 pH wort and fermented in a leaky bucket with no airlock for the first 3 days. So it might not turn out the same if fermented under less stress (from low pH) and I don't think I would open ferment a NEIPA for fear of oxidation. I don't have much experience with Hefe yeast so any feed back is appreciated. On a side note, this yeast took off faster than any dried yeast I've ever used and the krausen was about 10 inches tall.

I'd asked earlier in this thread for people to comment on their final ph as I believe it's important to balance sweetness from the malt/yeast and acidity levels of final ph in order to achieve more of a juice-like character and big mouthfeel. I know there's clearly more to it than that, but I think this too is an important component. I've been playing with adding some different acids to final beer including citric and have found it to help bring a lot of the juicy-like qualities to the forefront, including improving the mouthfeel. I've been targeting between 4.8 and 5.2. It's super easy to do, so I encourage folks to give it a try with some samples. I was surprised by the quick impact and overall difference it can make to the body and hop flavor.