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

[beervoid]

Have the same thoughts after finding out about wb06 being sta1 positive AFTER we’d been using it in our yeast blend. Oops.

but- if the folks who are seeing f2/cbc in there are correct then it’s entirely possible that solves the problem of diastaticus yeast in an unfiltered beer.

I dont think f2 or cbc would kill the glucoamalyse enzyme which is secreted by sta1 strains and responsible for higher attenuation.

 

[Clyde McCoy]

I still find it incredibly hard to believe that there is any diastaticus yeast in any Treehouse beer. WB-06 is diastaticus.

His PCR results look conclusive. It's not possible to replicate banding patterns like that. Perhaps it's contamination, but based on his attention to detail in the post, I'm not so sure. It is possible that Tree House is using a mutant yeast strain that is WB-06 genetic background but STA1Δ, although I doubt it. I would guess that it is co-pitched in very small quantities or perhaps even added after dry hopping. But maybe not, I really have no idea.

For those less scientifically inclined, from here:

Diastaticus is a variant of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (brewer’s yeast) with the ability to modify the fermentability of beer due to an STA1 gene which causes the organism to secrete glucoamylase, an enzyme which hydrolyzes dextrins and starches into fermentable sugars. The yeast is a “hyperattenuator” as it ferments beer beyond what ordinary brewer’s yeast is capable. It's often considered to be a beer spoiler or “wild yeast”, as it causes unwanted secondary fermentations in packaged beer.

 

[isomerization]

I find it pretty funny that the only common strain identified between this thread and the reddit one is (apparently) WB-06!

The odds of yeast floating around in the air with matching patterns for the commercial strains is extremely low. I started with the TH beers too, so that would minimize that chance of cross contamination.

Is it possible that STA1 expression could be down-regulated if the yeast is introduced to a low sugar environment (eg like at dry hopping)? @suregork any thoughts here?

Finally, can anyone explain how I can update the first post? I’d like to repost the lost images of the PCR reactions there.

 

[Clyde McCoy]

I find it pretty funny that the only common strain identified between this thread and the reddit one is (apparently) WB-06!

The odds of yeast floating around in the air with matching patterns for the commercial strains is extremely low. I started with the TH beers too, so that would minimize that chance of cross contamination.

Is it possible that STA1 expression could be down-regulated if the yeast is introduced to a low sugar environment (eg like at dry hopping)? @suregork any thoughts here?

Finally, can anyone explain how I can update the first post? I’d like to repost the lost images of the PCR reactions there.

I was about to ask if you could summarize your findings in a new post...this thread is rather large! Perhaps just make a new post and link your original post to the new one?

 

[day_trippr]

[...]Finally, can anyone explain how I can update the first post? I’d like to repost the lost images of the PCR reactions there.

Once a post has aged a few days it's no longer editable by the owner. It takes a moderator at that point.
They are generally amenable to minor edits - I never pressed the issue for wholesale changes or additions...

Cheers!

 

[isomerization]

Once a post has aged a few days it's no longer editable by the owner. It takes a moderator at that point.
They are generally amenable to minor edits - I never pressed the issue for wholesale changes or additions...

Cheers!

Maybe I could add a link to a specific post in this thread then?

 

[Clyde McCoy]

I find it pretty funny that the only common strain identified between this thread and the reddit one is (apparently) WB-06!

The odds of yeast floating around in the air with matching patterns for the commercial strains is extremely low. I started with the TH beers too, so that would minimize that chance of cross contamination.

Is it possible that STA1 expression could be down-regulated if the yeast is introduced to a low sugar environment (eg like at dry hopping)? @suregork any thoughts here?

Finally, can anyone explain how I can update the first post? I’d like to repost the lost images of the PCR reactions there.

Glucose represses STA1 expression, see here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC507009/

 

[isomerization]

Glucose represses STA1 expression, see here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC507009/

Interestingly enough, I think I have observed this when making a Dogfishead 120 clone. The WLP099 culture that I added after primary with Chico, along with serial sucrose feedings, did not dry the beer out (FG around 1.020).

Maybe TH is adding WB-06 with simple sugar and the dry hop?

 

[Clyde McCoy]

Interestingly enough, I think I have observed this when making a Dogfishead 120 clone. The WLP099 culture that I added after primary with Chico, along with serial sucrose feedings, did not dry the beer out (FG around 1.020).

Maybe TH is adding WB-06 with simple sugar and the dry hop?

Interesting idea, dextrose + WB-06 + dry hops...would also eliminate oxygen introduced during dry hopping. Especially if you're only dry hopping for a few days before dropping/transferring.

 

[couchsending]

I’m 99.9% positive the primary yeast in their beers is S04. It has this weird kinda bready ester. Honestly it’s pretty off putting to me. I still think their yeast esters tend to overpower the hops themselves. Drinking a Cachet right now as well as a beer I made with some sort of “hop blend” consisting of mainly S04 and a bit of S-33 and K-97. The similarities are obvious when it comes to the yeast derived aroma.

I also think their beers are sulfate heavy when it comes to water. They all have the light/drying effect I associate with sulfate heavy water profiles. Their beers are not Cl heavy beers at all.

 

[beervoid]

Interestingly enough, I think I have observed this when making a Dogfishead 120 clone. The WLP099 culture that I added after primary with Chico, along with serial sucrose feedings, did not dry the beer out (FG around 1.020).

Maybe TH is adding WB-06 with simple sugar and the dry hop?

Sugar is sucrose , Dextrose is a form of glucose, if its the right one to block sta1 expression I don't know.

It seems however very likely that Nate stumbled upon their blend perhaps by trying to mitigate oxygen intake by dry hopping and possible hop creep effects or even diacetyl reduction by pitching a bit of yeast + dextrose to naturally carbonate.
We know he is a fan of belgium beers. They are naturally carbonated.
Perhaps he liked the extra added character he got from this?

 

[beervoid]

Have the same thoughts after finding out about wb06 being sta1 positive AFTER we’d been using it in our yeast blend. Oops.

but- if the folks who are seeing f2/cbc in there are correct then it’s entirely possible that solves the problem of diastaticus yeast in an unfiltered beer.

It does still seems logical imho even if the glucose blocks the sta1, if there is some residual wb06 left in the brite and not enough glucose wouldnt this yeast be a good insurance.

 

[SanPancho]

What I will tell you is what we experienced, and other brewers who did troubleshooting with us. It takes a good long while before the referment takes place. Our range was a good 6 to 10 weeks. That’s when we started to notice the issues caused by refermentation.

Our takeaway? There’s some epigenetics happening here- it has to be turned on by environmental cues.

so- pitched in primary, not being expressed. Starved of simple sugars for a good while, it can get turned on.

Basically - While wb06 is active, there’s many sugars available. Once the simples are gone, and primary finished, the killer gets pitched and comes in and knocks the original yeast(s) out. So no reason for the enzyme to be produced as there is never an environmental cue for the gene to switch on.

if the gene was always on you’d see it act like brett and drive things to 1000 consistently. But it doesn’t, it’s not known for that at all.

im not claiming this is fact about TH, just saying if you’re gonna use a killer yeast to carb or condition, and it knocks out your primary yeasts, then there’s no reason to be afraid of using a diastaticus in primary.

 

[beervoid]

I have to say, I didnt drink much tree house beers but the ones I had def had that banana/bubblegum heffe/wheat aroma to them

 

[Clyde McCoy]

What I will tell you is what we experienced, and other brewers who did troubleshooting with us. It takes a good long while before the referment takes place. Our range was a good 6 to 10 weeks. That’s when we started to notice the issues caused by refermentation.

Our takeaway? There’s some epigenetics happening here- it has to be turned on by environmental cues.

so- pitched in primary, not being expressed. Starved of simple sugars for a good while, it can get turned on.

Basically - While wb06 is active, there’s many sugars available. Once the simples are gone, and primary finished, the killer gets pitched and comes in and knocks the original yeast(s) out. So no reason for the enzyme to be produced as there is never an environmental cue for the gene to switch on.

if the gene was always on you’d see it act like brett and drive things to 1000 consistently. But it doesn’t, it’s not known for that at all.

im not claiming this is fact about TH, just saying if you’re gonna use a killer yeast to carb or condition, and it knocks out your primary yeasts, then there’s no reason to be afraid of using a diastaticus in primary.

You lost me here. Glucose represses STA1 expression. In the absence of glucose (or in a low-glucose environment) STA1 should be expressed and glucoamylase secreted. Or have I misunderstood you?

 

[isomerization]

Sugar is sucrose , Dextrose is a form of glucose, if its the right one to block sta1 expression I don't know.

It seems however very likely that Nate stumbled upon their blend perhaps by trying to mitigate oxygen intake by dry hopping and possible hop creep effects or even diacetyl reduction by pitching a bit of yeast + dextrose to naturally carbonate.
We know he is a fan of belgium beers. They are naturally carbonated.
Perhaps he liked the extra added character he got from this?

Sucrose is Glucose (left) + Fructose (right), FYI

But they could be using dextrose as well, I’m just cheap lol.

 

[isomerization]

You lost me here. Glucose represses STA1 expression. In the absence of glucose (or in a low-glucose environment) STA1 should be expressed and glucoamylase secreted. Or have I misunderstood you?

This a generalization, but keep in mind these are transcription factors, so it’s not likely to be an instantaneous on/off switch.

Potential scenario:
1. Co-pitch S04/T58 for primary (get biotransformation from T58)
2. Drop yeast, transfer to bright tank, add dextrose/dry hops/WB-06 (turns off STA-1)
3. Add F2 (same as CBC-1) at packaging for product stability (stop WB-06 and protect against O2?)

Who knows though!

 

[SanPancho]

You lost me here. Glucose represses STA1 expression. In the absence of glucose (or in a low-glucose environment) STA1 should be expressed and glucoamylase secreted. Or have I misunderstood you?

yes, you arent following.

in the primary ferment, theres tons of sugars, both simple and complex. so with wb06 in the mix, no reason for the gene to express.

now once you hit FG, the environmental cues (no more easy food sources) could see the gene turn on. so you could see a referment happen eventually. (6 to 10 weeks in our experience, at cooler temp)

what i was saying, is that at the end of primary, the gene hasnt been turned on. even 4 or 5 days of dry hopping probably isnt enough time for the gene to turn on. so you add a killer yeast to do conditioning/spunding and the idea being that it does its work on the original sach yeasts (wb06 included) and knocks them out of commission.

so active wb06 would never see itself in a low food environment for long enough to have its gene kick on.

that, theoretically, is how i could see TH use wb06 in their beer - without sterile filtration- and not have gushers. you use killer yeast to take out wb06 before it has a chance to see its sta1 gene turn on.

we're in agreement.

 

[Clyde McCoy]

yes, you arent following.

in the primary ferment, theres tons of sugars, both simple and complex. so with wb06 in the mix, no reason for the gene to express.

now once you hit FG, the environmental cues (no more easy food sources) could see the gene turn on. so you could see a referment happen eventually. (6 to 10 weeks in our experience, at cooler temp)

what i was saying, is that at the end of primary, the gene hasnt been turned on. even 4 or 5 days of dry hopping probably isnt enough time for the gene to turn on. so you add a killer yeast to do conditioning/spunding and the idea being that it does its work on the original sach yeasts (wb06 included) and knocks them out of commission.

so active wb06 would never see itself in a low food environment for long enough to have its gene kick on.

that, theoretically, is how i could see TH use wb06 in their beer - without sterile filtration- and not have gushers. you use killer yeast to take out wb06 before it has a chance to see its sta1 gene turn on.

we're in agreement.

Great. And so you're aware, "yes, you arent [sic] following" didn't add much to this reply.

 

[SanPancho]

Great. And so you're aware, "yes, you arent [sic] following" didn't add much to this reply.

clarifying that the issue is that you're not following where i was going with the explanation. you asked if you misunderstood me- i said yes.

which i then explained in more detail (i hope).

and then pointed out that we are in fact in agreement. (which you werent sure of, as you didnt follow my explanation)

im working and internet surfing and answering emails and online shopping and getting harrassed by kids so be generous here on the semantics/technicalities.

 

[JohnConnor]

I’m 99.9% positive the primary yeast in their beers is S04. It has this weird kinda bready ester. Honestly it’s pretty off putting to me. I still think their yeast esters tend to overpower the hops themselves. Drinking a Cachet right now as well as a beer I made with some sort of “hop blend” consisting of mainly S04 and a bit of S-33 and K-97. The similarities are obvious when it comes to the yeast derived aroma.

I also think their beers are sulfate heavy when it comes to water. They all have the light/drying effect I associate with sulfate heavy water profiles. Their beers are not Cl heavy beers at all.

I have to agree on both points here. I got fresh cans a couple weeks ago for the first time in awhile. You can smell S04 from the second you crack the can. In Marshall's clone post, he always talks about a breadiness to their beers. He equated that to malt. I think he's off on that one. I was also surprise how dry of a beer it is. Definitely higher in sulfate. I'm so used to NEIPA's being the complete opposite. It was actually really nice.

At one time, I found an article cloning Green Flash Le Freak. The head brewer talked about pitching their Belgian yeast on day one so it would produce all the esters they were looking for and then day 2 they'd hit it with their house American strain. I've wondered about underpitching wb06 and letting it grow day 1, then hitting it with active starter, overpitch of SO4 day 2. Thinking if you overpitch SO4, could it out compete wb?

Or another thought, everything I've ever read about t58 and wb06 was how much people liked their starters because it really displayed the fruity/bubble gum notes. But they're never able to recreate that in an actual beer. Could you pitch S04 day one, when the beer hits 1.04 or so drop in some wb06/t58 as you're raising temps to help finish? Could the competition between yeasts and limited food be enough to stress during growth phase to create a lot of esters but shut them down between they get going?

I'm not close to an expert on yeast. Just spit balling some ideas.

 

[SanPancho]

we do s04 to start, then 36 ish hours later add in the wb06 and t58. 2 or 3% each. held at constant 64, then allowed to free rise for last 5 points or so.

tons of bubble gum. hard to pick out the hops, really getting mostly esters from it. we've stopped trying to compete with dry hops as its a bit pointless.

although now we have to decide whether we want to try a killer yeast protocol to stop wb06, or swap it for another dry wheat beer version. had no idea wb06 was sta1 positive until about two weeks ago.

 

[isomerization]

had no idea wb06 was sta1 positive until about two weeks ago.

You’ve been posting in this thread for 2 years though!!

 

[SanPancho]

You’ve been posting in this thread for 2 years though!!

i know, right? but i honestly dont ever recall seeing/reading that wb06 was diastaticus. and to be honest, doing nearly 2.5 years' construction on a new brew/restaurant/bar as well as a condo project and then my regular day job on top that, plus another baby and yadda yadda yadda, i wasnt actually paying a ton of attention to the constant posts here, so i turned them off. the only times i checked in this particular thread were just to see if anyone had come up with something new on the blend's strains/ratios.


i vaguely remember discussion about TH supposedly using the killer yeasts to stop folks from being able to grow the blend from dregs, but i honestly dont recall there being anything about sta1 and wb06 in that talk.

so yeah, somehow we completely missed that. and when trialing recipes at home the diastaticus issue wasnt noticed as the batches were small and rarely sat around for more than two weeks, three tops.

we literally brewed another batch about 2 weeks ago, and were about to dry hop right when i heard about the wb06/sta1 findings, and right when this corona stuff happened and everything shut down. i figure i have about another week or two to either drop some sugar and some cbc/f2 in there to kill the wb06, or maybe we'll just let it get super dry. thought about sorbates, but supposedly not as effective in the pH range of beer.

depending on how long this corona thing lasts, maybe this will be our no-enzyme unintentional-recipe bubble gum brut.

 

[beervoid]

Anyone here had any success mimicking the strong upfront bitterness thats doesnt linger at all which most Tree House beers have?

I've played with water profile, co2 extract and different timings but never got that super clean bitter.

 

[couchsending]

Anyone here had any success mimicking the strong upfront bitterness thats doesnt linger at all which most Tree House beers have?

I've played with water profile, co2 extract and different timings but never got that super clean bitter.

explain your water profile and pH targets.

co2 extract might help some if you were trying to get a ton of IBUs from it but for this “style” you’re probably not really doing that.

I don’t think they get any special extracts made... I’ve seen somethjng where one of the hop distributors advertised Nate using their Co2 extract for bittering but I doubt it’s anything special. There are downstream hop extracts to add to finished beer to increase bitterness but I don’t think it’s this crazy different bitterness.

Bicarbonates in your water and higher pH values are the biggest cause of stronger more lingering bitterness IMHO. Trying lowering the pH of
Your boil to 5.2 or 5.0 at the start.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Trying lowering the pH of your boil to 5.2 or 5.0 at the start.

At the start of the boil? (I likely already know the answer. Primarily looking for clarity here for those who might not.)

 

[Clyde McCoy]

Anyone here had any success mimicking the strong upfront bitterness thats doesnt linger at all which most Tree House beers have?

I've played with water profile, co2 extract and different timings but never got that super clean bitter.

Early on, Tree House Brewing began experimenting with CO2 Hop Extract in some of their hoppy beers. Co-founder Nate Lanier explains, “We have been using extract since 2013 when we found it could produce a smoother and more palatable bitterness. We like bitterness in our beers, and have found that extract produces a more consistent, predictable bitterness versus pellets which can degrade in unknown ways with age. We also aren’t afraid to use them later in the boil to give a bit of flavor in addition to that soft bitterness we crave.”

Today, one of Tree House’s most popular beers, Haze, utilizes Warrior® CO2Hop Extract. Described by Lanier as “one of our most intensely-hopped rotational beers, the use of extract gives a more rounded and pleasant bitterness in trials versus Warrior pellets.” In other beers, Tree House has found favor with variety-specific Chinook extract in flavor additions as “it definitely tastes more saturated/soft/round in the finished beer than pellets [and is] different and good in its own way!”

 

[couchsending]

At the start of the boil? (I likely already know the answer. Primarily looking for clarity here for those who might not.)

yes

and they definitely still add pellets to the kettle at some point during the boil. There are buckets at the brewery labeled “kettle hops” and I’ve been there when one has been dumped into the kettle. Not sure what beer it was however.

I don’t think the bitterness in their beers is really anything that different than some of the other better producers of the style personally. They are light on the palate for sure and rarely suffer from the hop astringency that you get from a lot of hazy overly hopped beers. I also don’t think in most of their beers they use the insane hopping loads that a lot of other breweries do. They rely on the yeast esters a lot more than other places. Too much so for my taste.

 

[beervoid]

we do s04 to start, then 36 ish hours later add in the wb06 and t58. 2 or 3% each. held at constant 64, then allowed to free rise for last 5 points or so.

tons of bubble gum. hard to pick out the hops, really getting mostly esters from it. we've stopped trying to compete with dry hops as its a bit pointless.

although now we have to decide whether we want to try a killer yeast protocol to stop wb06, or swap it for another dry wheat beer version. had no idea wb06 was sta1 positive until about two weeks ago.

Considering the fact that yeast derived esters are super volatile, wouldnt it make sense to add wb06 at the end and let it goe on the residual sugars and spund and possibly dry hop at the same time in order to keep the esters in?
If they dont use some closed system to dry hop this would be the way to keep the yeast esters in.
Pitching yeast together with dry hop seems counterintuitive for me though. It makes a yeasty haze and beer.
Anyone knows if they use a hop doser device or hopgun?

 

[beervoid]

explain your water profile and pH targets.

co2 extract might help some if you were trying to get a ton of IBUs from it but for this “style” you’re probably not really doing that.

I don’t think they get any special extracts made... I’ve seen somethjng where one of the hop distributors advertised Nate using their Co2 extract for bittering but I doubt it’s anything special. There are downstream hop extracts to add to finished beer to increase bitterness but I don’t think it’s this crazy different bitterness.

Bicarbonates in your water and higher pH values are the biggest cause of stronger more lingering bitterness IMHO. Trying lowering the pH of
Your boil to 5.2 or 5.0 at the start.

I start from RO and adjust ph to that range yes.
I've tried all kinds of sulfate chloride ratios and ppms always keeping ca below 70 or lower.

I dont really get to taste much of the American top ones but I've had Monkish which had a similar bitterness level but not the non lingering bite that disappears immediately like Tree House does.
Other Half is much less bitter. Sloop was the less bitter one.

Its like the bitterness only hits the front of your tongue and then quickly makes way for fruits and sweetness, super clean without any lingering at all.
I def get the sulfate dryness in their beers.

In my last trial I upped the IBU to around 45 for the 60min with warrior. And as an experiment I did the other batch forgoing the 60min addition and did whirlpool only.
The bitterness on the 45IBU is higher but they both still got that lingering bitterness albeit very light on the pallette.

Perhaps they use extract only in late kettle and whirlpool and avoid any green matter?
Perhaps the quality of their hops is so high that they extract more oils and flavor that it masks the lingering bitterness?
Perhaps their malt bill is sweet enough to coverup the lingering bitterness?

 

[beervoid]

You lost me here. Glucose represses STA1 expression. In the absence of glucose (or in a low-glucose environment) STA1 should be expressed and glucoamylase secreted. Or have I misunderstood you?

Early on, Tree House Brewing began experimenting with CO2 Hop Extract in some of their hoppy beers. Co-founder Nate Lanier explains, “We have been using extract since 2013 when we found it could produce a smoother and more palatable bitterness. We like bitterness in our beers, and have found that extract produces a more consistent, predictable bitterness versus pellets which can degrade in unknown ways with age. We also aren’t afraid to use them later in the boil to give a bit of flavor in addition to that soft bitterness we crave.”

Today, one of Tree House’s most popular beers, Haze, utilizes Warrior® CO2Hop Extract. Described by Lanier as “one of our most intensely-hopped rotational beers, the use of extract gives a more rounded and pleasant bitterness in trials versus Warrior pellets.” In other beers, Tree House has found favor with variety-specific Chinook extract in flavor additions as “it definitely tastes more saturated/soft/round in the finished beer than pellets [and is] different and good in its own way!”

I read that and hence I got me some co2 extract but without success besides it being messy and sticking to my kettle and fermenter.

 

[Clyde McCoy]

I read that and hence I got me some co2 extract but without success besides it being messy and sticking to my kettle and fermenter.

Do you heat it up before using it? I put my extract syringe in a plastic bag in very hot water for >10' before using.

 

[beervoid]

Do you heat it up before using it? I put my extract syringe in a plastic bag in very hot water for >10' before using.

Yeah I try and get it as fluid as possible. Also tried dissolving into vodka.
Not a fan of the stuff, I had the ctz blend flavor was too sharp.

 

[Taket_al_Tauro]

I also think their beers are sulfate heavy when it comes to water. They all have the light/drying effect I associate with sulfate heavy water profiles. Their beers are not Cl heavy beers at all.

What do you think the SO4 vs. Cl ppm are like in their beers? 200ish SO4 and 100ish Cl, or even more skewed towards SO4?

I'm asking because I want to give a shot at my first NEIPA attempt next, and I really want to steer away as much as possible from the overtly sweet, cloying examples of this style.
Wanted to go 150 Cl and 120-130 SO4, but I'm thinking it over again now...
My last west coastish-style IPA was like 180 SO4 and 90 Cl, and I found that to have a quite nice balance...

 

[brewpharm Hill]

Yeast can have an impact on perceived bitterness as well... I'm sure the yeast(s) along with careful water chem and hopping attributes to the pleasant and fading bitterness.

Also I saw this on twitter the other day:

https://twitter.com/TreeHouseBrewCo/status/1245137565411414016

Nate mentioned going through 4 yeasts for Haze. I wonder if and how much the yeast selection differs in their beers.

 

[brewpharm Hill]

What do you think the SO4 vs. Cl ppm are like in their beers? 200ish SO4 and 100ish Cl, or even more skewed towards SO4?

I'm asking because I want to give a shot at my first NEIPA attempt next, and I really want to steer away as much as possible from the overtly sweet, cloying examples of this style.
Wanted to go 150 Cl and 120-130 SO4, but I'm thinking it over again now...
My last west coastish-style IPA was like 180 SO4 and 90 Cl, and I found that to have a quite nice balance...

The julius clone has a great water profile to go by. https://trinitybrewers.com/brews/ipa/julius-clone-treehouse-brewing-ipa/

 

[SanPancho]

Considering the fact that yeast derived esters are super volatile, wouldnt it make sense to add wb06 at the end and let it goe on the residual sugars and spund and possibly dry hop at the same time in order to keep the esters in?
If they dont use some closed system to dry hop this would be the way to keep the yeast esters in.
Pitching yeast together with dry hop seems counterintuitive for me though. It makes a yeasty haze and beer.
Anyone knows if they use a hop doser device or hopgun?

personally I think folks are overthinking this stuff a bit. As noted, we dump all our yeasts in when there’s plenty of sugars. Plenty of sugar cues for the yeast that it’s time to multiply, which is when esters are created. Pitching a yeast for esters at or near FG seems pointless to me. (Unless it’s brett). There’s not nearly as much growth, so esters will be minimal. You start with more esters created, etc parabis, you end with more.

If you added more sugars, and wb06, and dry hops, then that could work and give you some esters. But not as much as pitching near OG. And wouldn’t you blow off a lot of the hop oils? Not to mention active yeast and dry hops together seems to favor haze and burn, but inhibit hop flavor/impact.

I guess what I’m saying is that it’s probably not as complicated.

yeast blend up front. Dry hop near fg and cap. Transfer to brite where you’ve already started some cbc/f2 going in either dextrose solution or fresh wort for krausening/carbing. Give it a week. Crash, can it. That lines up well with the three-ish week timelines that are stated.

that’s a fairly simple program with only one deadline to make (dh with points left). Occam’s razor.

 

[Clyde McCoy]

personally I think folks are overthinking this stuff a bit. As noted, we dump all our yeasts in when there’s plenty of sugars. Plenty of sugar cues for the yeast that it’s time to multiply, which is when esters are created. Pitching a yeast for esters at or near FG seems pointless to me. (Unless it’s brett). There’s not nearly as much growth, so esters will be minimal. You start with more esters created, etc parabis, you end with more.

If you added more sugars, and wb06, and dry hops, then that could work and give you some esters. But not as much as pitching near OG. And wouldn’t you blow off a lot of the hop oils? Not to mention active yeast and dry hops together seems to favor haze and burn, but inhibit hop flavor/impact.

I guess what I’m saying is that it’s probably not as complicated.

yeast blend up front. Dry hop near fg and cap. Transfer to brite where you’ve already started some cbc/f2 going in either dextrose solution or fresh wort for krausening/carbing. Give it a week. Crash, can it. That lines up well with the three-ish week timelines that are stated.

that’s a fairly simple program with only one deadline to make (dh with points left). Occam’s razor.

I think this is an important point. There is so much hype around Tree House beers that there is an assumption that their process is different from everyone else's. But look at this volume:

At this scale, how can you maintain quality and consistency with a complicated process?

 

[couchsending]

I think this is an important point. There is so much hype around Tree House beers that there is an assumption that their process is different from everyone else's. But look at this volume:

At this scale, how can you maintain quality and consistency with a complicated process?

Their beers ARE drastically different than most. They have an incredibly sophisticated brewery and obviously a talented staff. As long as SOP is followed it’s not that difficult.

I don’t think they’re doing anything that nuts other than not really force carbing their beers like everyone else does.

I don’t get much of the “alternate” yeast character in their beer to be honest. It smells like SO4 predominantly. Due to yeast needs for harvesting and repitching I find it hard to believe they’re mixing yeast from the get go. Even if you mix only small percentages in due to flocculation rates and other variables those percentages change really quickly. I’d be willing to bet they harvest the SO4 and then add dry hops and sugar plus other yeast and cap the tanks.