Possible issue with US-05/cleaner alternative?

[DVCNick]

History: I think my hoppy IPAs are drinkable, but unlike the styles I've done that don't require dry hopping, I would not say that they are commercial quality.

The one competition I entered with one of the hoppy IPAs (category 18 B), I still got several positive comments (about the aroma and head) but flavor was my lowest-scoring of the individual attributes. Some comments:

"Some yeasty notes, adds some estery flavors to the beer"
"Well made, maybe a touch sweet, esters take away from the hop flavors"
"....something Belgiany, estery"
"....outstanding aroma, but doesn't translate to the flavor. Mostly to style but a little estery for American pale".

Now... I'll be honest about my lack of experience here; I don't know exactly what they mean by estery, but, I think I have an idea. American Pale is supposed to be what I would consider "clean, clear, crisp" and with the hop flavors really standing out. And for sure, mine isn't that, at least not before I finish the keg. It does seem to clear up better right before the keg kicks. Also not sure why that is. But there is something "in the way" of the hop flavor as well. Maybe that is what they are talking about.

Competition batch was fermented at 68F.
So I thought I'd read with US05 that colder is cleaner, so I did another batch at fermented at 62. If anything, it has more of the attribute that I think they are calling "estery".

Does anyone have suggestions on how to improve this? Should I try a different yeast entirely?

 

[FloppyKnockers]

First of all. I would take any comment given by a judge with a grain of salt. Some judges out there are downright incompetent and love to throw around words like "Ester" to sound like they're not. Assuming your judges were good at their jobs, let's take a look at your recipe and process. Aside from your fermentation temps, which you mentioned, what does the rest of your recipe look like?

 

[Dland]

US-05 works out pretty clean for me. Usually in blondes and cream ales(often w rye instead of corn), not much to hide behind. I usually ran fermentation around 64-65F.

Perhaps the fact it was noted as a touch sweet could mean there are some unfermentables you want to work out, with more time or cooler mash. That might not help with esters though.

 

[DVCNick]

First of all. I would take any comment given by a judge with a grain of salt. Some judges out there are downright incompetent and love to throw around words like "Ester" to sound like they're not. Assuming your judges were good at their jobs, let's take a look at your recipe and process. Aside from your fermentation temps, which you mentioned, what does the rest of your recipe look like?

For a five gallon batch it is:
10lb 2 row
.75lb Caramel 20L
.5oz Horizon at 60min
2oz Citra at 10
2oz Citra at 1
2oz Citra dry hop

And I've ever only made it with US05 and it attenuates in the low 80's for an ABV in the mid 5's.

 

[brownni5]

Looks like a solid IPA recipe to me. I haven't experienced it, but some claim to get a "peachy" flavor from US-05. Maybe go with one of the liquid alternatives like Wyeast 1056 or WLP 001? I know they're all the "same" strain, but generations times are so short with yeast, you can actually see some drift pretty quickly, so it's reasonable to think they are different enough. I'm blanking on another ale yeast that would be that clean (*cough*, boring, *cough*). Maybe Nottingham if you would prefer dry?

I'm with the above though - I think I'd have a hard time pulling esters out if that, especially with that much Citra (which for some reason I can taste if a bag of Citra was left out next to the brew). It very well could be the judges searching for something.

 

[FloppyKnockers]

For a five gallon batch it is:
10lb 2 row
.75lb Caramel 20L
.5oz Horizon at 60min
2oz Citra at 10
2oz Citra at 1
2oz Citra dry hop

And I've ever only made it with US05 and it attenuates in the low 80's for an ABV in the mid 5's.

I think the judges were high. This looks like a great recipe. If I wanted to take out any possible sweetness from this I would go pale malt in place of 2-row and Carapils instead of Caramel 20. I think that would be a mistake though.

I would try this recipe again and submit it to a different competition. You didn't mention if you cleared it or not. If not, you could try that as it could clean up the flavor quite a bit. Post a pic of the ribbon when you get your next results back.

 

[DVCNick]

I think the judges were high. This looks like a great recipe. If I wanted to take out any possible sweetness from this I would go pale malt in place of 2-row and Carapils instead of Caramel 20. I think that would be a mistake though.

I would try this recipe again and submit it to a different competition. You didn't mention if you cleared it or not. If not, you could try that as it could clean up the flavor quite a bit. Post a pic of the ribbon when you get your next results back.

Thanks... that is one of the issues though. I used Whirfloc in the boil but it is still quite hazy. I've had clear glasses of it before, but that is toward the end of the keg only. Not sure why that is, or if it is linked to the taste.

 

[Loud Brewing]

Thanks... that is one of the issues though. I used Whirfloc in the boil but it is still quite hazy. I've had clear glasses of it before, but that is toward the end of the keg only. Not sure why that is, or if it is linked to the taste.

The beer will clear on it's own over time, that is why you eventually get a clear pour. Whirlfloc and other products like it will help drop proteins but not yeast. To speed up the process try using gelatin or a similar fining agent on the cold side to help drop the yeast, this will make for a very clear beer with a "cleaner" profile in a short period of time.

 

[FloppyKnockers]

Thanks... that is one of the issues though. I used Whirfloc in the boil but it is still quite hazy. I've had clear glasses of it before, but that is toward the end of the keg only. Not sure why that is, or if it is linked to the taste.

I use Irish Moss (Whirlflock) in most all of my beers. Alone it does nothing. Not even sure why I still do it. For beers that I want clear from the first pint I will use gelatin. It's as easy as throwing some dissolved gelatin into a really cold fermenter a few days before kegging. I do this for all my lagers and competition beers.

 

[DVCNick]

Well, I've heard of gelatin usage, but have never tried it... maybe it is time to look into it.

I take it the haze is mostly suspended yeast in this case then?

Would an "estery" quality come from suspended yeast that would be greatly reduced or eliminated once it is clear?

You always hear that hoppy IPAs are best fresh, so is there a rule of thumb hinge point between drinking them fresh and waiting for them to get clearer?

I've never sat a keg of this around long enough to see if the whole thing will clear with enough time.

 

[kingmatt]

History: I think my hoppy IPAs are drinkable, but unlike the styles I've done that don't require dry hopping, I would not say that they are commercial quality.

The one competition I entered with one of the hoppy IPAs (category 18 B), I still got several positive comments (about the aroma and head) but flavor was my lowest-scoring of the individual attributes. Some comments:

"Some yeasty notes, adds some estery flavors to the beer"
"Well made, maybe a touch sweet, esters take away from the hop flavors"
"....something Belgiany, estery"
"....outstanding aroma, but doesn't translate to the flavor. Mostly to style but a little estery for American pale".

Now... I'll be honest about my lack of experience here; I don't know exactly what they mean by estery, but, I think I have an idea. American Pale is supposed to be what I would consider "clean, clear, crisp" and with the hop flavors really standing out. And for sure, mine isn't that, at least not before I finish the keg. It does seem to clear up better right before the keg kicks. Also not sure why that is. But there is something "in the way" of the hop flavor as well. Maybe that is what they are talking about.

Competition batch was fermented at 68F.
So I thought I'd read with US05 that colder is cleaner, so I did another batch at fermented at 62. If anything, it has more of the attribute that I think they are calling "estery".

Does anyone have suggestions on how to improve this? Should I try a different yeast entirely?

Hmmm, it is often difficult to pick up esters in highly hopped beers because esters in general produce some fruity flavors that may be similar to the hops. It looks like some of the feedback given specifically mentions "Belgian esters" which makes me wonder if they are talking banana or clove. If you are getting clove like esters it may actually be a phenolic issue, which could be a water/sanitation issue.

 

[DVCNick]

These are done in the same fermenters as a wheat beer that uses WB-06 and is supposed to have banana and clove... I feel like I clean them out pretty good though?

 

[eric19312]

I see "belgiany" in your judges comments. Not typical comment for clean chico yeast fermentations but is a typical comment for contaminated beer.

I'm not surprised you didn't like US-05 at 62 better than 68. 68 is a great temperature for this yeast.

You mentioned kegging so I assume you are not bottle conditioning the competition beers. Might want to bottle extras when submitting to the competition so you can taste it out of the bottle when reading the judging notes. Possibly the beer is changing in the bottles into something that doesn't really match what you have in the keg and out of a bottle the comments might make more sense.

 

[DVCNick]

Well I've had a run of big bubbles in starters and fermenters recently. I've posted some pictures and most say it is normal, but it looks different to me. I switched to a new yeast packet in the most recent starter.. still big bubbles.
So I don't know for sure if I have some mystery contamination.

Competition beers were force carbed and bottled with a beer gun.

 

[eric19312]

Well I've had a run of big bubbles in starters and fermenters recently. I've posted some pictures and most say it is normal, but it looks different to me. I switched to a new yeast packet in the most recent starter.. still big bubbles.
So I don't know for sure if I have some mystery contamination.

Competition beers were force carbed and bottled with a beer gun.

Why are you making a starter with dry yeast? One pack for this beer. Rehydration not necessary: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/...on-and-also-does-not-require-aeration.665957/
Fermentis data sheet indicates US-05 is part of the E2U line.

 

[Mer-man]

Is DVC for Diablo Valley College?

 

[DVCNick]

Why are you making a starter with dry yeast? One pack for this beer. Rehydration not necessary: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/...on-and-also-does-not-require-aeration.665957/
Fermentis data sheet indicates US-05 is part of the E2U line.

I've direct pitched in the past but I've taken to doing a starter now so I can pour some off and use it for a new starter for next time to get many batches out of one packet... I know most people harvest from the bottom of the fermenter, but I figured this way I'd have less chance of contamination, saved yeast is never gone through wort above 1.040, etc... is there a reason why I shouldn't do that?

Is DVC for Diablo Valley College?

Sorry, no.

 

[brownni5]

I've direct pitched in the past but I've taken to doing a starter now so I can pour some off and use it for a new starter for next time to get many batches out of one packet... I know most people harvest from the bottom of the fermenter, but I figured this way I'd have less chance of contamination, saved yeast is never gone through wort above 1.040, etc... is there a reason why I shouldn't do that?


.

No, this seems fine.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I would suggest you look more deeply at your yeast health and procedures.
Do you oxygenate your yeast at pitching?
Do you add zinc or any other nutrient?
Are you pitching an adequate amount for your OG?
Are you monitoring internal fermentation temps or only external ambient temp?
Vigorous ale yeasts in a high gravity environment can easily add 5-8 degrees to the beer temp above outside ambient temps.

All that aside, try an alternate yeast like WLP090.

Sure you can get decent beer by pitch-it-and-forget-it with a dry yeast, but you can improve on it if you pay more attention to making happy yeast.

 

[eric19312]

I've direct pitched in the past but I've taken to doing a starter now so I can pour some off and use it for a new starter for next time to get many batches out of one packet... I know most people harvest from the bottom of the fermenter, but I figured this way I'd have less chance of contamination, saved yeast is never gone through wort above 1.040, etc... is there a reason why I shouldn't do that?

Nothing wrong with this practice and this is a hobby so if you enjoy doing it go for it. I think the cost savings is probably pretty small and you are introducing some potential for contamination but to me biggest reason not to do it is dry yeast really makes for a flexible brewing schedule. No building starters during the week for weekend brew session that runs into life and gets pushed out a couple weeks.

I do tend to use the same yeast batch to batch and don't worry about this issue of never letting the yeast get exposed to wort over 1.040. I don't brew super high gravity stuff these days but 1.055 doesn't seem to hard on the yeast. I have conical for harvesting good quality yeast but used to do it just fine taking out of the bottom of the fermentor with a sanitized ladle and storing in a mason jar, dry hops or no dry hops. I am careful to evaluate the beer from every batch before reusing it's yeast. Attenuation and flavor profile. Anything off and the yeast gets dumped and I start over. With the conical I am getting much nicer yeast and suspect I'm over pitching by a large margin.

 

[DVCNick]

I would suggest you look more deeply at your yeast health and procedures.
Do you oxygenate your yeast at pitching?
Do you add zinc or any other nutrient?
Are you pitching an adequate amount for your OG?
Are you monitoring internal fermentation temps or only external ambient temp?
Vigorous ale yeasts in a high gravity environment can easily add 5-8 degrees to the beer temp above outside ambient temps.

All that aside, try an alternate yeast like WLP090.

Sure you can get decent beer by pitch-it-and-forget-it with a dry yeast, but you can improve on it if you pay more attention to making happy yeast.

I don't oxygenate the starter, beyond swirling, but I have been oxygenating all my recent batches of beer.

I do not consistently add yeast nutrient (starter or beer), though I do have it available.

My OG is almost always in the 1.050 to 65 range. I do a starter size of about 1500ml per 5 gallons. I don't have a stir plate, I just swirl every so often for a couple days till it looks mostly done, then crash, decant, and pitch.

I use a thermowell almost all the time to measure internal temp, except in cases where I need a blowoff tube for a couple days, then I tape the probe to the outside of the fermenter and lower temp a couple degrees to account for internal temp rise.

 

[mattdee1]

No way to know for sure, but count me among those suspecting that the word "ester" was used incorrectly by the judges.

Now, the reference to Belgian flavors I don't doubt one bit, based on direct personal experience. I have used S05 countless times, but I have had 3 blonde ales brewed with that yeast that ended up with a distinct Belgian character when I was shooting for and expecting a clean/crisp result. Of those, 2 were cases where I tried re-using harvested yeast. The other one was a direct pitch of a packet, but it was a very early brew, and the only thing I can come up with as an explanation is maybe I lapsed a bit on my sanitation.

It's not exactly a vast well of data, but I have resolved to never again try to re-use harvested S05. New packets are cheap.

For other clean-tasting dry yeasts, my other go-to strains are Nottingham and BRY-97.

For liquid, WLP001 is a safe choice. I've currently got a ferment going with WLP090 and WLP060 which both get favorable reviews for clean-tasting beers, so we'll see how those turn out.

 

[dwhite60]

You can use the dregs out of a bottle to make a starter. Done it many times.

Usually I just save slurry and repitch it.

All the Best,
D. White

 

[RM-MN]

No way to know for sure, but count me among those suspecting that the word "ester" was used incorrectly by the judges.

Now, the reference to Belgian flavors I don't doubt one bit, based on direct personal experience. I have used S05 countless times, but I have had 3 blonde ales brewed with that yeast that ended up with a distinct Belgian character when I was shooting for and expecting a clean/crisp result. Of those, 2 were cases where I tried re-using harvested yeast. The other one was a direct pitch of a packet, but it was a very early brew, and the only thing I can come up with as an explanation is maybe I lapsed a bit on my sanitation.

It's not exactly a vast well of data, but I have resolved to never again try to re-use harvested S05. New packets are cheap.

For other clean-tasting dry yeasts, my other go-to strains are Nottingham and BRY-97.

For liquid, WLP001 is a safe choice. I've currently got a ferment going with WLP090 and WLP060 which both get favorable reviews for clean-tasting beers, so we'll see how those turn out.

What is more likely than sanitation is temperature control during fermentation. When you pitch a slurry you often get more yeast and the fermentation starts off very quickly. If you don't have very good temperature control the yeast will drive the temperature above the preferred range and that will give you the flavors you associate with Belgian beers.

 

[mattdee1]

What is more likely than sanitation is temperature control during fermentation. When you pitch a slurry you often get more yeast and the fermentation starts off very quickly. If you don't have very good temperature control the yeast will drive the temperature above the preferred range and that will give you the flavors you associate with Belgian beers.

That's an interesting possible explanation I hadn't considered.

Funny thing about that though, is on the case of this where I got the Belgian character after pitching a new packet of S05. For that one, I indeed lost control of fermentation temperature for a short time during the growth phase, but in the other direction. It was winter, and as it turned out, the room where my fermentation fridge was setup got so cold that I actually needed heating to bring the fermentation temperature up to the desired range. The day after pitching I noticed that the STC-1000 temperature probe was reading something way low (forget what it was) so I put a 60W lamp inside the fridge to heat the beer up to the target mid-60s temperature. At the time, I attributed the flavor flaw to that little mishap, but kind of abandoned the idea over time because it didn't seem to mesh with conventional wisdom on the subject. Who knows.