mixed yeasts ? good idea or no?

[benderislord]

ok folks new to this board but familiar with the fine art of fermentations so i ask of all the yeasts out there for low gav and high what would be if any the best blends? i am looking for a neutral yeast with a longer fermentation and high end gravity but i want a decent flavor i have heard of friends using a blend of champagne,distillers and lager yeast i dont know what % of each but hae heard it works great what is the take on this from you fine beer folks?


brew well and stay thirsty

 

[Calder]

???? Don't have a clue what the question is.

Windsor has low attenuation with a lot of flavor.

 

[benderislord]

well i am looking for a general usage yeast or blends that would go well with a cider or beer i also plan on washing and re-pitching the yeasts i want something that will handle a higher abv but without some of the off flavors that come with those yeasts

 

[theredben]

Forgive me if I am mistaken, but it sounds like you are not very familiar with beer yeasts. You seem to be under the impression that there are only 2 types of beer yeasts, ale and lager. Those are more like 2 large groupings with some overlap in between. There are literally hundreds of varieties of beer yeasts (some of them are pretty similar though), it just depends on whether you want something with high/low ester production (read fruitiness), high/low flocculation (read clear beer), and what temperature you can ferment at.

Regarding mixing yeasts, that is a common practice although it can be hard to maintain the proper ratio if you reuse the yeast as one strain will outgrow the other given enough time.

If you give us some examples of what you are fermenting, and tell us if you can control temperatures, then we can give you some examples of yeasts to use.

 

[SchlazzGraft]

As theredben mentioned, there are tons of yeast strains and its pretty easy to find one that'll give you the flavor you're looking for. If you want to get the best of both worlds for a couple types of yeast, i'd say a good way would be to do two separate smaller fermentations and then blend the two beers after fermentation has finished. This would ensure that one strain didn't outgrow the other.

I'm somewhat new to brewing, but this seems proper to me. Hope it helps!

 

[benderislord]

well i am planning on a double IPA with a black porter twist and some very hard crisp cider the IPA is what i am most concerned on the yeast selection i wish to keep the color nice dont mind on murk as long as its nice heady an retains or enriches the hops the cider i was thinking about mixing jus a small amount of distillers yeast in with the normal champagne/cider yeast

 

[devilishprune]

Well sir, you can make your beer with that, but it won't have the nuances that you (probably) will expect.

Champagne yeast is for...champagne (or cider). And, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but distiller's yeast is just fast, alcohol tolerant yeast that's not necessarily concerned with flavor.

For your IPA, I would recommend US-05/WLP001/Wyeast1056. Those are all clean, american ale strains that will give you what you're looking for. They all have alcohol tolerance around 11% (at least 1056 does). Also, US-05 is dry (read: cheap).

If you want something a little fruitier for your ales (which I prefer) then use Wyeast1272/WLP051. These strains are also more flocculent and will clear more than the above strains.

For your cider, you can use champagne yeast, or any wine yeast. I made one with Lalvin-EC118 and I didn't really like how it turned out, but YMMV.

Just because you want to have a potentially high gravity beer doesn't mean that you need some crazy, explosive turbo-yeast 3000. If you post your recipe, then it's possible that the board could help you out with that, if you want.

Hope that helps.

 

[winvarin]

Will blending really yield results? Brewing with yeast is, at the end of the day, just a controlled infection, is it not?

I had always assumed that unless the blending was done in a lab environment by people who know a whole lot more about biology that I ever learned, that the strongest strain just survived and crowded the others out. That would seem to make it nearly impossible to control "nuances" by adding a few percent of this yeast and a few percent of that.

Isn't that part of the reason (aside from yeast stress) that pitching rate is so important? You get to the battlefield first with the most soldiers and opposing armies like the myriad of bacteria that can infect a beer have less of an opportunity to get going.

I recently had a completely non-scientific, totally anecdotal experience that I, again assumed, was proof of this concept. I made a Saison in late summer. I decided to brew on a whim and did not have time for a starter. Instead, I decided that I would go with 2 vials of Whitelabs yeast. When I got to my LHBS, they had just one vial of 565. So I bought that, and a vial of 550. My thinking was that I would at least hit in the right ballpark and that perhaps blending the two would help me overcome 565's reputation as a slow finisher.

The result was a great beer that is remarkably Saison-like, but that only drew a 38/50 in that category at a recent competition. One remark that came back repeatedly is that the citrusy/peppery finish they expected from a Saison was "muted". One possible reason I gave myself for those comments was my use of the 550 in concert with the style-specific yeast. Did I "mute" some of those characteristics myself by introducing a yeast that might have overpowered my Saison yeast?

Sorry. This post was significantly longer than I'd anticipated

 

[JonK331]

well i am looking for a general usage yeast or blends that would go well with a cider or beer i also plan on washing and re-pitching the yeasts i want something that will handle a higher abv but without some of the off flavors that come with those yeasts

Safale -05 or -04 will suit your IPA needs just fine.

 

[benderislord]

sorry folks been hectic thnx for all the great replies i will take note of the saf strains and others mentioned i was just tossing out a good question a friend of mine and i were in a little confusion over thnx for the clarity .....on a beer board :rockin:

 

[Frodo]

Do you have a "minimal or no punctuation" rule, and "absolutely no capital letters" rule or something? It makes it really difficult to determine whether you're asking a question, making a statement, or just like bla bla bla bla bla... Sorry in advance, and yes I've been drinking.

 

[ksbrain]

I tried mixing yeast once. I made a barley wine with US-05, S-04, and WY1338. One jar of repitch of each (normally one jar does a single 1.060 batch for me). The result was not so good. I will not do it again. I'm not sure if it was the yeast or not, but my conclusion was it's best to pick a yeast and use it.

 

[Tall_Yotie]

As has been said before (and if you are new to brewing especially) go with a yeast that is meant for the style as there is a great deal of options. I have only mixed yeasts once, and that was for mead as I needed to get the flavors from a yeast but wanted another neutral yeast that would held the mead end dry.

And also as mentioned above, PLEASE use punctuation. One long run-on sentence is difficult to read and understand. Most of the internet seems to not care, but we prefer it here.

 

[benderislord]

well thnx yet again.grammar police eh? oh well.guess some post when more sober than others . me and my friends view this site while drinking some great cold ones.explanation,not an excuse for the run ons. any who great answers everyone *with exception of a lil rudeness* and i have my choice now.i am going with a safal for dry on a black double ira. when brewed will keep y'all posted


:rockin:

 

[Tyler B]

I know this thread is really old, but, geez... what a gem! I'm so glad I searched up past threads on mixing yeast before starting a new one.

OP, your writing style reminds me of a mix between Jim Anchower from the onion and Dean Moriarty/Neal Cassady from On The Road. Love the energy! Hope your brew session turned out alright, my man.

 

[davidabcd]

Oh, man, the d****e bags swarmed to this thread back in '11! Ironically, every time I see a corrector, I need only to glance at their own post and I'll see grammatical errors. By the way, I understood exactly what the OPer meant in post number 1.
I had a similar question and I've been combining M-41 and T-58 lately to good results.

 

[Frodo]

Oh, man, the d****e bags swarmed to this thread back in '11!

Calling someone a d****e bag for asking for punctuation?

 

[davidabcd]

Calling someone a d****e bag for asking for punctuation?

That plus the second paragraph of post #13.
"Do you have a "minimal or no punctuation" rule, and "absolutely no capital letters" rule or something?"
was an unmistakably rude question and also directed at a brand new member at the time. You even tried to justify it in your own post by saying you had been drinking.
I wouldn't try and defend it if I were you; just own up to it and move on.

 

[monkeymath]

Not sure why we'd be discussing this here, but here we go.

That plus the second paragraph of post #13.
"Do you have a "minimal or no punctuation" rule, and "absolutely no capital letters" rule or something?"
was an unmistakably rude question and also directed at a brand new member at the time. You even tried to justify it in your own post by saying you had been drinking.
I wouldn't try and defend it if I were you; just own up to it and move on.

Call me uptight if you want, but I do conceive it as disrespectful if someone does not even make the slightest effort to structure his thoughts, delivering an unrevised stream of consciousness (love the Dean Moriarty reference @Tyler B ) instead.
Before I hit "Post Reply", I reread my own post to make sure I deliver my thoughts in a clear and concise manner. It is my job to make sense of the noise in my head, not the reader's.
Invariably, my posts sometimes still contain errors - grammatical errors, typos, and stuff where I am simply plain wrong -, but at least I made an effort.

As a general rule: a post will only be written once, but usually read multiple times. It is merely very basic common sense that the effort of unraveling the content should be done only once, during writing, instead of dozens of times when people are reading it.
And it is very basic general courtesy to try and minimize your opposite's effort if you want to be heard.

Edit: as far as excuses go, I am not drunk. But I'm German, so that should count.

~ Daniel

 

[davidabcd]

@monkeymath

Good post plus funny in places.

We have much common ground on this. I also take care, without going to extremes, to provide a communication that is easily understood by the intended audience. I've no doubt, as well, I miss something here or there.

What we don't know is the actual capability of the writer. Some simply do not write well and an attempt to embarrass or speak down to them to "fix" the situation--when they couldn't even if they tried--doesn't sit well with me.

I don't read a poorly written post and believe that someone's being disrespectful; I assume they're doing their best to communicate. I guess it's possible they are being disrespectful or what have you, but I can't imagine it being more than a minuscule percentage. Say the are being disrespectful or just careless, what kind of response and positive result can be expected toward a pedantic or sarcastic or angry sort of reply? In that case, is the intention really meant to be positive or just mean? I'd say it was mean.

We all have the choice not to read a poorly written post. For those it bothers, I would say skip them. For those who feel compelled to correct in a rude way, I think they enjoy needling and use "bad grammar" as the vehicle for their negativity which can be just a short-term blip or their general personality.
In retrospect, because I don't pay much attention to it, I see posts ranging from "perfect" to "yikes." I'm not bothered by it as I kind of enjoy unwrapping the meaning like a puzzle. Most importantly, I'm not going to attempt to belittle someone by whatever method. If a post is truly indecipherable, there are tons of ways to figure it out by being polite and respectful.

 

[monkeymath]

@monkeymath

Good post plus funny in places.

You should see me at parties; my fun facts about bridges and rare native birds of the middle east never cease to spark joy and laughter.

The position you laid in your post - always assuming everyone is trying his best and laying off judgement - is indeed honourable and a mindset that I strive to achieve.

Truth be told, I am not convinced that careless punctuation is predominantly a symptom of incapability rather than unwillingness, but this will be hard to resolve in general, so I'd prefer to put this issue at rest.

But then, I think you should equally cut these "correctors" (as you called them) some slack, presume that they have simply not reached that state of mind (yet), instead of calling them a *********.

 

[davidabcd]

You should see me at parties; my fun facts about bridges and rare native birds of the middle east never cease to spark joy and laughter.

Busy day and so the delay.
I'm going to guess Monte Python fan or similar, more or less? And you found Arrested Development brilliant?

But then, I think you should equally cut these "correctors" (as you called them) some slack, presume that they have simply not reached that state of mind (yet), instead of calling them a *********.

While I maintain my general position, I will concede that two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[davidabcd]

Calling someone a d****e bag for asking for punctuation?

I still hold to the main points of my post earlier but using a derogatory at all to get that point across was uncalled for; I should have explained my reasoning in, at the very least, a cordial manner. I apologize.

 

[Althozgraz]

use kveik, specifically voss. you can ferment at 68 degrees and be done in a week, it can handle up to 16% roughly without much of any yeast character. you can also dry the yeast for re-use.

 

[WiSilverBrewer]

ROFLMAO....nine years after the posts, I read post after post about proper English, punctuation and manners followed by one answering the OP's post - 9 years later

That's precious....couldn't help but laugh

Now, each of you bring three shrubberies (or is it shrubberys, or is it 1 "b"....oh the horror)

 

[davidabcd]

ROFLMAO.

Ignored.

 

[RainyDayBrewer]

Champagne yeast makes cider too dry and flavorless. Try a much weaker wine yeast with more esters if you want something drinkable... without monitoring, pasteurizing, and back-sweetening. I know the original poster will be many years done, but perhaps someone else will be saved from ethanol-dishwater.

 

[dwhite60]

Supposedly Nottingham dry yeast is a blend of a traditional ale yeast with a lager yeast. I have read it works well in cider too. Might be what you are looking for.

All the Best,
D. White

 

[RainyDayBrewer]

Thanks. I’ve heard that about the Nottingham too. Next season I may try it. Last season I wanted my Apple juice back. I guess the champagne yeast drank it up so I didn’t have to.

Supposedly Nottingham dry yeast is a blend of a traditional ale yeast with a lager yeast. I have read it works well in cider too. Might be what you are looking for.

All the Best,
D. White