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

[overthebarsbrewing]

I'm really glad you are using a "control" with the 1318! If I had the capabilities in my setup, would have done something similar. My only concern with batch 3 is that the WB-06 is the most attenuative, so you will likely be at FG when adding, or farther away from the real FG than you think, if that makes sense. Not sure it's a huge issue though...

Yes, I decided to do this yeast pitch schedule with the following amalgamation of thoughts in mind (thanks to the many that have contributed in this thread!):

1.) Underpitch S-04 and T-58 first at ~75F starting temp with no oxygenation

Rationale:
--S-04 & T-58 are very quick fermenters; according to Fermentis data, should reach their max attenuation somewhere between 2-3d after start of fermentation
--T-58 seems to produce more fruity/juicy esters at higher temps
--Both of these strains produce moderate esters and do not ferment maltotriose well (both leave ~20 g/L of residual sugars, ~1/2 of which is maltotriose)

2.) Target pitching WB-06 and adding fermentation dry hops when SG is down to ~4-6pts above final SG

Rationale:
--WB-06 produces lots of esters, has a high attenuation, and ferments maltotriose. Adding a smaller amount nearing the end of previous fermentation should hopefully: (1) make it a bit more “stressed” to produce more esters due to small pitching amount, availability of mainly complex sugar sources, low wort oxygen content, and (2) slower WB-06 fermentation could make esters stay in the wort.


I am unsure if it will still plow through the remaining complex sugars and over-attenuate. But you only know if you try it, I guess!

 

[melville]

How does it taste? Does the carafoam lend any sweetness?

The beer is delicious (galaxy, amarillo, and simcoe) — I get pineapple, tangerine, and red grapefruit and the extended conditioning (with CBC-1) really seems to bring the melange together IMO. No weird phenolics, no spice.

On the carafoam lending sweetness — if it does it's certainly not overbearing, especially since I was having a dryness issue anyway with the attenuation rate.

 

[melville]

Interesting (and old) tidbit on aeration and esters — likely strain specific but in this case aeration 12-24 hours after pitching led to significantly more esters.

Isn't it always the way? You do as much research as you can and post it off,
only to find a significant new piece of information immediately after. I
felt I had better add this tidbit, but this is it, I promise!
I discussed this ester thing with some brewers I know (from Hahn here in
Sydney), and they told me "aeration produces esters". They have practical
first hand experience with this as when they repitch yeast from their yeast
propagator, the resulting batch is always very estery and needs to be
blended out with subsequent batches. (the yeast propagator is a
mini-cylindroconical, maybe about 1-2hL, which is continually aerated to
produce vast amounts of healthy yeast).
This was interesting by itself, but one of them gave me a recent Brauwelt to
read (no. 1 /96) p18, "Zymotechnical factors and beer quality" by S.
Donhauser and D. Wagner, from Weihenstephan. The Weihenstephan yeast bank
supply yeast to commercial breweries. They tested their most popular one
(strain 34/70 - maybe there is a Wyeast lager equivalent but I don't know
which one) and varied pitching rate, fermentation temperature and aeration.
They measured such things as attenuation, fermentation rate, fermentation
byproducts (including two esters, ethyl acetate and isopentyl acetate) and
also DLG sensorics. They made no attempt to explain possible theories, but
just give raw data.
Well guess what? Aeration 24 hours after pitching *increased* the measured
ester concs.
The figures are (mg/l)

max 1 ppm 9 ppm 9ppm
9ppm with yeast
w/o yeast w/o yeast w/o yeast with yeast
and second aeration
ethyl acetate 13.3 16.4 13.4 14.1
16.5
isopentyl acetate 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.3
1.5
DLG score 30.2 31.4 33.2 35
32

max w/o yeast was wort aerated to saturation without the yeast present
during aeration

It is interesting that the wort with very little aeration had almost as much
esters as the one with the most aeration! It is also interesting that the
beer made from wort aerated to saturation without yeast present was the
least favoured by the taste panel!

Other parameters:
high pitching rate increased esters (opposite of what I said before)
temperature increased esters.

The authors conclude that
"Good oxygen supply to the yeast results in very rapid fermentation even
under cold fermentation conditions, yeast reproduction and thus formation of
young cells is promoted and above all, and this is the very crux of this
subject - very good beers are brewed. Aeration together with the yeast is
favourable in every respect. If secondary aeration which will again
accelerate fermentation is carried out, the point in time selected should
not be too late as this may adversely affect beer quality."

elsewhere they say,
"It is certainly better to carry out secondary aeration at an earlier point
in time ie. after 12 hours and not after 24 hours."

These figures are the opposite of evrything I have seen before. This is the
first study I have seen on lager beer. This suggests that the effect will be
dependent upon the yeast strain. The magnitude of the difference is lower
than from other studies. The head brewer from Hahn agrees that it is likely
to be strain dependent.

So, after all that, I guess I agree with Tracy when he says you cannot
really generalise on this issue. Yeasts will behave differently, and unless
you are very familiar with a particular strain, the affect of aeration on
ester production will be indeterminate. The only factor that all studies
agree on, is that an increase in temperature will increase ester production.

So, after all that, we're none the wiser!

Esterhead Walsh.

http://hbd.org/hbd/archive/2086.html (somewhere near the bottom)

 

[evozero]

I didn't knew that Mosaic could give bubble gum flavors, maybe TH use it to aument that flavor in Julius

 

[Northern_Brewer]

I've just spent a couple of hours completely riveted reading this whole thread, by people I don't know trying to recreate a beer I will almost certainly never drink. Here in the UK we seem to have two expressions of the "juicy" trend, one which is recognisable as beer with some attempt at bitterness and one which is pure fruit juice, with minimal effort made to balance out the fruit with alpha. I can quite enjoy the first but I find the latter as unbalanced as a 200 IBU alpha-bomb, and I don't particularly like them.

Anyway, it's great to see everyone getting so enthusiastic over "natural carbonation" or cask conditioning as we'd call it on this side of the pond. Shall I hand out CAMRA membership forms? Next you'll be saying that serving cold kills the flavo(u)r and these things need to be served at 54-57F cellar temperature to appreciate all the volatile aromas...

Just some thoughts on the ester thing - although I'm now confused by that latest report that the commercial beers aren't so estery.

Is anyone using yeast nutrients to help promote ester formation? Zinc in particular can help, adding amino acids will as well but can promote other undesirable compounds. It's the sort of thing that commercial brewers are much more aware of than homebrewers due to the challenges of keeping large volumes of yeast happy, and it sounds the sort of thing that Nate would geek over (whereas complaining about strike water being nearly 10F off target is definitely not geeking, it's pretty much the difference between alpha and beta amylase)

Separately from the pitching warm or keeping warm for the first day or so, http://www.asbcnet.org/publications/journal/vol/abstracts/bc1995a15.htm suggests you get most esters by dropping from 65F to 52F after 2.5 days, more than if you just hold at 52 or 65. Fitting in with the evidence of the TH control panel, perhaps they're pitching warm, then letting it drift down to hold at 66F until the krausen starts to subside, then letting it drop further to 60F for the rest of the fermentation? That way you get esters but also quite a "clean" and gentle fermentation, with plenty of time to clean up any fusels etc?

It's interesting about oats, over here they're pretty much regarded as canonical for NEIPA but their high lipid content inhibit ester formation : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jib.178/full

I guess the lipids may also be the reason why trub in the fermenter is also bad for ester development : http://www.asbcnet.org/publications/journal/vol/abstracts/49-28.htm

Although we get most Weyermann stuff here, I've never seen Carafoam - I'm not sure if that's because the name is owned by a caravan mattress company here, maybe it gets renamed. The guides suggest that it's not quite the same as Carapils or Caramalt but they're close enough, may even try good old crystal or Simpsons dextrin.

 

[hcb_ryk]

@melville
How many oz of hops did you use in the dry hop and whirlpool to hit 4.4 pH?

 

[StinkyBeer]

Carafoam = Carapils = Weyermann Dextrin

 

[melville]

@melville
How many oz of hops did you use in the dry hop and whirlpool to hit 4.4 pH?

I'm doing half batches of these attempts. So for a 2.75 gallon batch I put in 5oz in the dry hop (divided in two, 2 days and 5 days). When I kegged I put another 2.5 in (with CBC-1).

On the hot side I deliberately tried my best to get a lot of hops in there while minimizing their IBU impact.

80 IBUS. 1/3 from hop extract at 60. 1/3 from a 5 minute addition. 1/3 from a 10 minute flame out addition. Probably 5 oz. of hops. So A LOT of hops.

Definitely my most saturated attempt with a really nice rounded bitterness.

(Note: this is inspired in part by what we know about TH — Green and Julius were at one time listed at 80 and 70 IBUS, now Nate says they are over 100. Green is called Green because the wort was so green from all the hops, so my singular effort here was more hops, hence the limited contact time — pitching at 85F also aids in that strategy.)

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Carafoam = Carapils = Weyermann Dextrin

They may be used for similar purposes, but they're not the same. A 5-minute Google has failed to turn up detailed specs from official sources, but this thread seems plausible, some of the numbers seem to come from Briess directly. Short version :

Weyermann has the Carapils trademark in Germany, Briess in the US.

Briess Carapils is a crystal malt that's 100% glassy, 1.3 Lovibond, all-malt viscosity 3.7 centpoise.

Weyermann Carafoam is a hybrid between normal and crystal malt, 2.5% glassy, 1.5-2.9 Lovibond, 1.58 centpoise.

So Carapils is paler than Carafoam but contributes more than double the body (I know it's not that simple...). I'll go and bury my head in spec sheets but something like 50:40:10 pale:carapils/crystal:wheat feels plausible as a Carafoam substitute?

 

[StinkyBeer]

Weyermann Carafoam = Weyermann Carapils in UK = Equivalent UK malts is Dextrin

 

[evozero]

@melville how it rates your current brew vs one brewed using 1318?

Do you feel the taste is similar to a beer of th?

 

[Tijuanatovar]

I've been blending 1318 and SO4 for my past 2 batches and have been so satisfied with them that I haven't bothered to change the recipe. Prior to doing this blend I did these 2 yeasts seperate and blended them but it wasn't the same. All bottle conditioned. The blend def. improved the mouthfeel. Interesting thread.

 

[melville]

@melville how it rates your current brew vs one brewed using 1318?

Do you feel the taste is similar to a beer of th?

I'm loving this current beer. Starting from the ground up has been very helpful. This has a similar sort of tartness I'd get with 1318 and the synergy of the three strains comes off very fruity, but I would have to do another 1318 beer to know for sure how this compares. But yes, this does remind me of TH. I think now it's just up to individual taste where one ends up on their ratio (which I actually dialed up a tad in my currently fermenting beer, though now perhaps I think it should be dialed down a hair).

As I think @StinkyBeer said, TH doesn't really hit you over the head with esters, everything is perfectly balanced, they just seem to have a pinch of special sauce (and roundness) when compared to something like Trillium (which I also quite like).

 

[evozero]

@Tijuanatovar are you blending 50/50?

 

[TheHairyHop]

I've been blending 1318 and SO4 for my past 2 batches and have been so satisfied with them that I haven't bothered to change the recipe. Prior to doing this blend I did these 2 yeasts seperate and blended them but it wasn't the same. All bottle conditioned. The blend def. improved the mouthfeel. Interesting thread.

Did you bottle condition before you switched to mixed yeast fermentation?

 

[Tijuanatovar]

Did you bottle condition before you switched to mixed yeast fermentation?

Yeah. I started kegging and switched to bottle conditioning and noticed the difference with natural carbing as opposed to my crappy kegging abilities in sankes. Blending 50/50 at initial pitch. Bottling straight from the fermenter.

 

[hcb_ryk]

@melville
One more question. Did you rehydrate or oxygenate prior to pitching?

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

Finally got my brew day in. Made 0.5BBL of my standard NEIPA base wort recipe and used Citra/Mosaic hops.

Split it into 3 fermenters and am going to do the following:

FV#1: Used WY1318. Pitched from a starter at standard ~0.75M cells/ml/*P This will get ferm-hopped at day 3. Plan to transfer when ferm complete and will slowly force-carb. Will add keg hops.

FV#2: Same as above but plan to transfer to a keg when ferm complete. Will have keg hops in there and will attempt to naturally carb with CBC-1.

FV#3: Did an initial pitch of 6gm S-04 and 2gm T-58 at ~78*F. My plan is to check SG after ~48-72h and then pitch 2gm of WB-06 with ferm hops when SG is ~4-6pts above expected final SG. Will transfer to a keg with keg hops in there and will attempt to naturally carb with CBC-1.

Hopefully will be interesting!!!

***Batch Update***

I took sample for SG this afternoon. This represents ~60h after I pitched the yeasties.



FV#1 & FV #2 (Both 1318):

SG reading was ~1.040 (OG=1.068). This is pretty close to what I expect from many previous batches with 1318 after ~2.5d of fermentation.

Aroma: "Moderately strong" (can smell it ~6in above top of glass). I get mainly pineapple, orange, peach, and mango. With a general "sweetness".

Taste: Generally sweet, predominantly pineapple/peach/orange.



FV#3 (S04 & T58 co-pitch):

SG reading was ~1.020 (OG=1.068). Holy crap are these yeasties fast fermenters (as expected though)!!!!

Aroma: "Very strong" and MUCH stronger than the 1318 batch. MUCH more complex mix of aromas. In order of strength to my nose: Juicy fruit gum, orange, pineapple, ever so slight banana, and just a bit of what I'll call "generic subtle spicyness".

Taste: Tough to directly c/w 1318 because of big difference in attenuation. I get a very pleasant mouthfeel that is not too thin, not too thick. Very light citrus in the range of sweeter grapefruit and orange, also some stonefruit (peaches? nectarines?). NO banana that my taste buds can perceive. I really, really like it and it's in the ballpark of TH beers.


NOW, I'm on the fence about what I should do about adding WB-06. I'm tempted to just let the S04/T-58 sit for a few more days to clean up, then transfer to keg for carbing/conditioning with CBC-1. This beer honestly is close to ready to drink IMHO. But, I think I might just stick with my original plan (pitch WB-06, let it ferment for 2-4 days, check a SG, and then transfer to keg for carbing/conditioning).

Added my ferm hop charges to all 3 FVs. All 3 beers are dang tasty, which is what's most important!!!

 

[JJ900]

Was FV#3 at 78F the whole time?

 

[TheHairyHop]

Yeah. I started kegging and switched to bottle conditioning and noticed the difference with natural carbing as opposed to my crappy kegging abilities in sankes. Blending 50/50 at initial pitch. Bottling straight from the fermenter.

Sorry, I don't know if my question was clear. I meant, did you introduce bottle conditioning as a process before you began doing fermentations with the blend? I'm just wondering if your results are from bottle conditioning or the yeast blend, or both

 

[Tijuanatovar]

Sorry, I don't know if my question was clear. I meant, did you introduce bottle conditioning as a process before you began doing fermentations with the blend? I'm just wondering if your results are from bottle conditioning or the yeast blend, or both

Oh gotcha. I bottle conditioned before, but just a couple batches. It's been less oxidation plus I dig bottles more than kegging for some reason.

 

[Tijuanatovar]

@overthebarsbrewing you mind sharing your recipe and process? Sounds bomb!

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

Was FV#3 at 78F the whole time?

So I started the S04/T58 at 78F. The other two were at ~76F. All 3 are fermenting in my basement. Ambient air temp is 70-72F. I took a temp reading of the beer when I took the SG sample and it was ~74F.

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

@overthebarsbrewing you mind sharing your recipe and process? Sounds bomb!

Sure...I'm away this weekend...will post details on exact % when I get home but:

0.5BBL batch into fermenters

Grain bill:

-Maris Otter, White wheat, Flaked oats
-Small amts of Honey & Acid malts

Hops: ~120 IBU
- Citra @ 45min
- Citra/Mosaic @ 20min, 5min, WP, & ferm hops

 

[evozero]

A friend of mine brewed a neipa with 1318 to compare vs my soon to be ready neipa with the blended yeast.

All i can say is that his beer is a perfect clone of Alter ego with the exception of aroma, his was more pungent.

This is going to be a good parameter for me.

 

[skibb]

A friend of mine brewed a neipa with 1318 to compare vs my soon to be ready neipa with the blended yeast.

All i can say is that his beer is a perfect clone of Alter ego with the exception of aroma, his was more pungent.

This is going to be a good parameter for me.

Perfect clone eh? Mind posting his recipe? Alter Ego is one of my favorites!

 

[Sbe2]

All i can say is that his beer is a perfect clone of Alter ego with the exception of aroma, his was more pungent.

That's a bold statement.

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

Sure...I'm away this weekend...will post details on exact % when I get home but:

0.5BBL batch into fermenters

Grain bill:

-Maris Otter, White wheat, Flaked oats
-Small amts of Honey & Acid malts

Hops: ~120 IBU
- Citra @ 45min
- Citra/Mosaic @ 20min, 5min, WP, & ferm hops

Here's the detailed info from the last 5gal batch:

Recipe Specifications
--------------------------
Boil Size: 6.00 gal
Post Boil Volume: 5.21 gal
Batch Size (fermenter): 5.00 gal
Bottling Volume: 5.00 gal
Estimated OG: 1.070 SG
Estimated Color: 6.2 SRM
Estimated IBU: 121.4 IBUs
Brewhouse Efficiency: 72.00 %
Est Mash Efficiency: 72.0 %
Boil Time: 45 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amt Name Type # %/IBU

5 lbs 5.3 oz Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 3 40.9 %
5 lbs Pale Malt, Maris Otter (3.0 SRM) Grain 4 38.4 %
1 lbs 9.6 oz White Wheat Malt (2.4 SRM) Grain 5 12.3 %
7.6 oz Oats, Flaked (1.0 SRM) Grain 6 3.7 %
5.9 oz Honey Malt (25.0 SRM) Grain 7 2.8 %
4.0 oz Acid Malt (3.0 SRM) Grain 8 1.9 %

45min:
7 g Citra (HBC394) - HopsDirect 2016 [13.30 Hop 9 10.7 IBUs

20min:
11 g Citra (HBC394) - HopsDirect 2016 [13.30 Hop 10 13.1 IBUs
11 g Mosaic (HBC 369) - HopsDirect 2016 [9.20 Hop 11 9.1 IBUs

5min:
40 g Citra (HBC394) - HopsDirect 2016 [13.30 Hop 12 26.5 IBUs
40 g Mosaic (HBC 369) - HopsDirect 2016 [9.20 Hop 13 18.3 IBUs

Whirlpool (30min at ~180F start):
40 g Citra (HBC394) - HopsDirect 2016 [13.30 Hop 14 25.9 IBUs
40 g Mosaic (HBC 369) - HopsDirect 2016 [9.20 Hop 15 17.9 IBUs

Dry Hops (added @ Day#3 of Ferm):
56 g Citra (HBC394) - HopsDirect 2016 [13.30 Hop 17 0.0 IBUs
56 g Mosaic (HBC 369) - HopsDirect 2016 [9.20 Hop 18 0.0 IBUs


**Note: I usually do 100% Maris Otter as base grain but didn't have enough for this batch...

 

[couchsending]

Are you convinced you're getting that many IBUs from a whirlpool below 180*?

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

Are you convinced you're getting that many IBUs from a whirlpool below 180*?

Not entirely. I'm sure its less...I've brewed this recipe at least 5 times and it has a pleasant balancing bitterness in the background. I should have added a "theoretical" disclaimer to the IBU total

 

[evozero]

That's a bold statement.

We tasted his beer right next to a fresh 08/15 can of treehouse Alter Ego at least my wife and I couldnt distinguish the taste from one to the other, just by the aroma.

Don't know his recipe, but i know he used pale malt carapils, oats and 1318 yeast.

That he used 1318 was what really got me wondering if i was just doing a lot of extra work with the % and dry yeast to get a similar result

 

[JohnConnor]

Pretty interesting stuff. I guess two things come to mind after reading all 71 pages.

First, what is the likelihood we can get an accurate yeast make up from dregs? Kind of seems like a red herring to me. Second, every interview I've ever watched/read from Nate always, always talks about simplicity and repeatability. He also always talks about process and limiting variables. I don't think he's bull****ting us with those words which leads me to think we're over complicating this.

 

[TheHumanTorch]

Nate always, always talks about simplicity and repeatability. He also always talks about process and limiting variables. I don't think he's bull****ting us with those words which leads me to think we're over complicating this.

Pitching a blend of dry yeast, by weight, is very simple from a commercial brewery perspective. There is a lot more work involved with successfully harvesting, storing, cleaning, and (re)pitching liquid yeast for multiple generations. One other benefit of dry yeast is that it is much less expensive than liquid. Affordability makes it feasible to pitch a fresh quantity of dry yeast each batch.

It's completely possible that they are using a single strain, but it's worth investigating co-pitching, considering the ease.

 

[JohnConnor]

I also found this from Imperial:

B56 Rustic
This unique yeast can be used in your saison, farmhouse ale, or other Belgian styles where high ester levels are important. Rustic typically produces a lot of bubblegum and juicy aromas that compliment complex maltiness.

Interesting they call out bubblegum and juicy from a Belgian strain. I don't necessarily get bubblegum out of their beers but I know people who do. Only problem is that I can't seem to find a replacement from other companies.

 

[JohnConnor]

Pitching a blend of dry yeast, by weight, is very simple from a commercial brewery perspective. There is a lot more work involved with successfully harvesting, storing, cleaning, and (re)pitching liquid yeast for multiple generations. One other benefit of dry yeast is that it is much less expensive than liquid. Affordability makes it feasible to pitch a fresh quantity of dry yeast each batch.

It's completely possible that they are using a single strain, but it's worth investigating co-pitching, considering the ease.

I'm not denying this point. But fluctuating temps and timing different yeast additions seem like it could add variables to the mix. One interview says Nate hates variables.

 

[NJGeorge]

I mentioned in a previous post that i get a coffee like aroma/flavor in tree house leading us to believe it is a type of malt used. While drinking a hazelnut flavored coffee this morning I was surprised how much it reminded me of the nose on a treehouse beer. Which grain is known to give hazelnut notes?

 

[couchsending]

Vienna or Carahell would be my guess? On the Weyerman charts these two have the highest levels of nut I believe (hazelnut, almond). At least for malts I think would make sense.

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

***Batch Update***

I took sample for SG this afternoon. This represents ~60h after I pitched the yeasties.



FV#1 & FV #2 (Both 1318):

SG reading was ~1.040 (OG=1.068). This is pretty close to what I expect from many previous batches with 1318 after ~2.5d of fermentation.

Aroma: "Moderately strong" (can smell it ~6in above top of glass). I get mainly pineapple, orange, peach, and mango. With a general "sweetness".

Taste: Generally sweet, predominantly pineapple/peach/orange.



FV#3 (S04 & T58 co-pitch):

SG reading was ~1.020 (OG=1.068). Holy crap are these yeasties fast fermenters (as expected though)!!!!

Aroma: "Very strong" and MUCH stronger than the 1318 batch. MUCH more complex mix of aromas. In order of strength to my nose: Juicy fruit gum, orange, pineapple, ever so slight banana, and just a bit of what I'll call "generic subtle spicyness".

Taste: Tough to directly c/w 1318 because of big difference in attenuation. I get a very pleasant mouthfeel that is not too thin, not too thick. Very light citrus in the range of sweeter grapefruit and orange, also some stonefruit (peaches? nectarines?). NO banana that my taste buds can perceive. I really, really like it and it's in the ballpark of TH beers.


NOW, I'm on the fence about what I should do about adding WB-06. I'm tempted to just let the S04/T-58 sit for a few more days to clean up, then transfer to keg for carbing/conditioning with CBC-1. This beer honestly is close to ready to drink IMHO. But, I think I might just stick with my original plan (pitch WB-06, let it ferment for 2-4 days, check a SG, and then transfer to keg for carbing/conditioning).

Added my ferm hop charges to all 3 FVs. All 3 beers are dang tasty, which is what's most important!!!

***Batch Update #2***

--I added 2gm WB06 & ferm hop charges on 8/18./17

--I took 2nd sample on 8/22/17...represents ~4d after pitching WB06.
--SG reading was ~1.018...expected a bit more attenuation after 4d w/ WB06, but perhaps only having more complex sugars available and the small pitch amount affected it's ability to attenuate.
--Taste & Aroma: Generally very similar to sample taken after 2.5d. Flavor profile has become a little more complex and I think I get just a little bit more spicyness/pepper. But it's in the background and not at all overpowering the citrusy sweeter grapefruit, orange, peach, and mango flavors.

--I plan to transfer to keg w/ CBC-1 & dextrose priming sugar to begin natural carbing today.

 

[overthebarsbrewing]

Pretty interesting stuff. I guess two things come to mind after reading all 71 pages.

First, what is the likelihood we can get an accurate yeast make up from dregs? Kind of seems like a red herring to me. Second, every interview I've ever watched/read from Nate always, always talks about simplicity and repeatability. He also always talks about process and limiting variables. I don't think he's bull****ting us with those words which leads me to think we're over complicating this.

Pitching a blend of dry yeast, by weight, is very simple from a commercial brewery perspective. There is a lot more work involved with successfully harvesting, storing, cleaning, and (re)pitching liquid yeast for multiple generations. One other benefit of dry yeast is that it is much less expensive than liquid. Affordability makes it feasible to pitch a fresh quantity of dry yeast each batch.

It's completely possible that they are using a single strain, but it's worth investigating co-pitching, considering the ease.

Yes, most here have acknowledged the % breakdown of colonies found from the dregs have a large margin of error. Which is why people have been experimenting with different ratios that seem like they could be plausible. Same thing goes with co-pitching all at once vs. staggering vs. temperature stable vs. ramping up/down. Part of the fun of the scientific process!


My simplified takes on all the experimentation & results so far (coupled with info that Nate/TH have revealed here-and-there):

1--I'm pretty convinced that S-04 is the "workhorse" yeast in most (if not all) of their core beers.

2--There are probably minor roles for T-58 and/or WB-06 in the production of their core beers. Our data are not strong enough to unequivocally say:
(a) T-58/WB-06 are in *ALL* their core beers (no colonies of WB06 found in sample of Julius dregs, no colonies of T-58 found in Green)
(b) T-58/WB-06 are used in primary fermentation vs. conditioning.
(c) T-58/WB-06 are being co-pitched at start vs. added along the way during fermentation.

3--CBC-1 is being used as their conditioning/carbing yeast.


I'm doing my experimentation batches with these basics in mind and loving every minute of it. It's undoubtedly improving my skills as a brewer.

 

[TheHairyHop]

This thread has made me appreciate the accuracy and effectiveness of dry yeast, but also the wonderful qualities of 1318. I'll still be giving speisse with CBC a shot