Singing the praises of dry yeast

[mew]

Question on saving yeast: Do you have to wash the yeast or can you just rack it to sanitized bottles? I have seen both and wasn't sure which was preferred (the best?) If I had to guess I would think that washing it would be for more long term storage.

I think the accepted theory is that yeast that will be used in a short time (not sure how long "short" is) doesn't need washing; but if you intend to keep for a while, washing is best.

 

[The Drizzle]

that is sexual in nature.

 

[Beerthoven]

Question on saving yeast: Do you have to wash the yeast or can you just rack it to sanitized bottles? I have seen both and wasn't sure which was preferred (the best?) If I had to guess I would think that washing it would be for more long term storage.

Think about the stuff that's in a yeast cake: hop resin, break proteins, lots of dead yeast cells, vegetable matter from the grains and hops, etc. Why would you want to put that junk into a nice new wort?

 

[AdIn]

All that experience pretty convincing. I think I'll try Saflager W-34/70 which is suppose to be equivalent of Bohemian 2124 for my next octoberfest. Do you aerate the wort before pitching rehydrated yeast?

 

[Bobby_M]

Think about the stuff that's in a yeast cake: hop resin, break proteins, lots of dead yeast cells, vegetable matter from the grains and hops, etc. Why would you want to put that junk into a nice new wort?

Sound reasonable in theory but when you think of it, it was just sitting in your "old" delicious brew. If it's all that nasty, it would have ruined the previous batch too. When you pitch that slurry, most of the heavy particulates just go back to sitting on the bottom along with the stuff introduced on the new batch.

I've only gone as far as pitching unwashed slurries so far and one of the reasons I haven't played the wash game is fear of introducing contaminants through open air pouring etc. You can be really careful but the more you play with it, the riskier it gets (kinda like a Vietnamese massage parlor).

 

[Mutilated1]

You can be really careful but the more you play with it, the riskier it gets (kinda like a Vietnamese massage parlor).

lol

 

[Beerthoven]

Sound reasonable in theory but when you think of it, it was just sitting in your "old" delicious brew. If it's all that nasty, it would have ruined the previous batch too. When you pitch that slurry, most of the heavy particulates just go back to sitting on the bottom along with the stuff introduced on the new batch.

I've only gone as far as pitching unwashed slurries so far and one of the reasons I haven't played the wash game is fear of introducing contaminants through open air pouring etc. You can be really careful but the more you play with it, the riskier it gets (kinda like a Vietnamese massage parlor).

Yeah, this could be one of those non-issues that we like to discuss ad nauseum. I know a lot of people have had success pitching onto old yeast cakes. More power to 'em.

But, at some point you do rack the beer away from the yeast cake/trub in order to avoid problems with head retention, flavor stability, off flavors, and infection. If you pitch a new wort onto an old cake, wouldn't it increase the possiblity of these bad things happening?

If done properly, washing yeast seems no more problematic than any other brewing process.

I've never used an old yeast cake, so I can't claim first hand to have experienced problems from it. But I do believe that healthly fermentation starts with pitching the proper amount of clean, healthy yeast. You have no idea how many, how clean, or how healthy the yeast are in an old cake. Even Jamil Z has cautioned against it, and that's good enough for me.

EDIT: Hmmm...this is one of those posts that I'll reread a day later and realize I sound like an argumentative prick. Better add some emoticons...

 

[Bobby_M]

It's really hard to know for sure if there's any perceivable difference unless you split batch it. I've pitched 10 gallons of wort onto a cake produced from another 10 gallon batch and from early tasting, it's a really clean brew. Maybe a fresh batch of yeast would have been better but I'll never know for sure.

 

[JnJ]

All that experience pretty convincing. I think I'll try Saflager W-34/70 which is suppose to be equivalent of Bohemian 2124 for my next octoberfest. Do you aerate the wort before pitching rehydrated yeast?

Yes, you always aerate before pitching any type of yeast.

 

[Soulive]

I pitched a rehydrated packet of s-04 in my oatmeal stout yesterday (I swear, that yeast seems to proof, not just rehydrate, when you put it in warm water). Took off actively within eight hours...

Ditto on all accounts. I LOVE DRY YEAST! :rockin:

 

[Reverend JC]

i prefer my yeast to not impart any flavors so i can taste the malt!

For certain beer styles you need special yeasts to impart different flavors. Clean fermenting yeasts are not always to style if you care about that stuff. My LHBS guy could give a crap less about beer styles. I say to him "do you think this........will keep this beer to style?" and more than one occasion he says to me "how would i know, i brew what i like not what fits into any style." he is actually pretty funny about it. good guy.

 

[Dude]

The mailman was a good man today!

That's 1500 grams of dry yeast - roughly enough for fifty 15 gallon batches! Unfortunately, I can't post the source, as it was a favor from a friend. However, I don't think I'll be needing any yeast for a while! Vacuum sealed in sanitary conditions, this stuff lasts for a LONG time.

I've got beer wood. WOW!

 

[srm775]

But, at some point you do rack the beer away from the yeast cake/trub in order to avoid problems with head retention, flavor stability, off flavors, and infection. If you pitch a new wort onto an old cake, wouldn't it increase the possiblity of these bad things happening?

But the main thing is that when you're racking from primary to secondary, you're racking a finished beer off of the yeast cake. There are no more nutrients, food and oxygen for the yeast to consume. So, they become fat and lazy (much like me ) and fall to the bottom. However, when you introduce fresh food for them in the way of a new wort, then they reactivate and do their thing again.

 

[the_bird]

The mailman was a good man today!

That's 1500 grams of dry yeast - roughly enough for fifty 15 gallon batches! Unfortunately, I can't post the source, as it was a favor from a friend. However, I don't think I'll be needing any yeast for a while! Vacuum sealed in sanitary conditions, this stuff lasts for a LONG time.

How did I miss this picture? Damn, that's sexy...

What's the K-97? Never heard of that...

 

[Bobby_M]

I'd imagine these bricks are meant for commercial breweries but why would they be so difficult for homebrewers to get them?

 

[jfrizzell]

What's the K-97? Never heard of that...

According to Fermentis: A German ale yeast selected for its ability to form a large firm head when fermenting. This top cropping ale yeast is suitable for top fermented beers with low esters levels and can be used for Belgian type wheat beers. Sedimentation: low. Final gravity: low.

 

[Desert_Sky]

According to Fermentis: A German ale yeast selected for its ability to form a large firm head when fermenting. This top cropping ale yeast is suitable for top fermented beers with low esters levels and can be used for Belgian type wheat beers. Sedimentation: low. Final gravity: low.

wow, i need to try that stuff out

 

[Yuri_Rage]

I'd imagine these bricks are meant for commercial breweries but why would they be so difficult for homebrewers to get them?

They are typically only sold at a wholesale level. I looked pretty hard for an online supplier, and I didn't have a whole lot of luck. That's when fate stepped in, and I got a bit of a lucky break.

 

[doublegun]

Everyone seems to be posting about Nottingham.

Any comments about Windsor ? I did a test between the 2 on a partial mash, and the Nottingham seemed better ... can't really describe why I liked it better...

We did a True Brew Wheat kit, used Windsor at our LHBS guy's recommendation. Not quite true to style, but an exceptionally good American wheat beer was the result. Try it.

 

[mew]

We did a True Brew Wheat kit, used Windsor at our LHBS guy's recommendation. Not quite true to style, but an exceptionally good American wheat beer was the result. Try it.

Was it just the cloudiness level that was off, or tastes too?

 

[Baron von BeeGee]

According to Fermentis: A German ale yeast selected for its ability to form a large firm head when fermenting. This top cropping ale yeast is suitable for top fermented beers with low esters levels and can be used for Belgian type wheat beers. Sedimentation: low. Final gravity: low.

The head part sounds like Wyeast 1338, but it attenuates pretty moderately. It's almost worth brewing something with it just to check out the mutant kraeusen it produces!

 

[hopshead]

I have been a homebrewer for a year and half now and I have used dry yeast twice. I have a strong feeling though that I will become a dry yeast convert. I mail ordered my ingredients for the first time from Northern Brewer and I elected to get a pack of US-56 because I guessed it would travel to SC better than a liquid yeast. If the US-56 works as well as the Cal ale from white labs, I will continue to us the dry yeast. The price is great. We will see how it goes.

 

[mew]

Welcome to the forum hopshead!

 

[ohiobrewtus]

I haven't used any dry yeast since my first two extract batches. I'm going to have to give it a try sometime and see how it compares to the WL strains that I've been using and washing.

 

[JeffNYC]

Same here, my first beer was dry then only liquid yeasts until recently. I used Nottingham for my last beer (American IPA) and planned for this weekend for a Cranberry Ale, figuring the yeast character of these two beers was critical (to me). Unfortunately, I like to brew Belgian-style beers. I'd love to learn how the T-58 maps to Wyeast and White Labs. In an e-mail from Fermentis:

"The SEBREW yeast has been selected with the help of a Belgium Brewer."

So this may work. I'll give it a shot this Spring.

 

[kappclark]

Just rec'd shipment from AHBS, which included a packet of Wyeast 1098.

Even though I packed in ice for an extra whopping 99cents, it was still warm when it arrived

I know it will be OK, but I know there wouldn't be the same plm/worry with good old Nottingham...

I think I will try to harvest this yeast after the primary .. get some mileage

 

[elkdog]

BUMP.
Thanks to this thread, I used a packet of Windsor in my Strong Ale last night. It's got a full kreusen developed this morning, and is puttering away, only 8 hours after I pitched. I'm gonna go a hefe in January, and that will be the only time in the near future that I mess with liquid. This was just too easy.

 

[westerntrout]

Safale has a dry hefe yeast now. too new to know anything about it but I picked up a pack for the next hefe and will see what happens.

 

[elkdog]

Is it a German or American hefe yeast? I actually just listened to the Jamil show on American wheats and ryes, and I may go with a clean fermenting strain like Nottingham for the hefe, as I'm trying to minimize the bananas and cloves. Jamil uses a Kolsch yeast in his American wheat, so maybe a hefty dose of Nottingham and low fermentation temps would get me close without having to make a starter or pay for liquid yeast?

 

[hoffmeister]

I'm going to throw in my two cents worth...
I started out with dry yeasts when I started brewing a few years ago, then made the switch to liquid because I thought it would really help my beer. After a few batches, I found that it either made no difference or actually resulted in some rather funky brews, as I think someone else pointed out on here some months ago. I switched back to dry (Nottingham) for my most recent batch, and as of yesterday it was still happily fermenting away. We'll see how it turns out, but I'm back to dry yeasts.

 

[Kai]

I'm not all that experienced, but I have yet to get a 'clean' profile from dry yeasts. The only batches I've made that have blown me away were made with Wyeast. I haven't gotten around to doing a side-by-side yet, but every beer I've made with Nottingham has had a distinct, funky, gross-ester-and-dirty-fermentation taste. I'm learning more every day about proper aeration, pitching rates, fermentation temps, etc, but even a recent APA I made with Nottingham for a friend* has this foul yeast profile. Clean isn't everything - most styles benefit from good yeast characters - but I'd have preferred that to what I got.

Anyone tried Cooper's, by the way? Haven't tried it since my first batch. Nothing good to say about that, either.

*Friends shouldn't let friends use this yeast.

 

[Dude]

I'm not all that experienced, but I have yet to get a 'clean' profile from dry yeasts. The only batches I've made that have blown me away were made with Wyeast. I haven't gotten around to doing a side-by-side yet, but every beer I've made with Nottingham has had a distinct, funky, gross-ester-and-dirty-fermentation taste. I'm learning more every day about proper aeration, pitching rates, fermentation temps, etc, but even a recent APA I made with Nottingham for a friend* has this foul yeast profile. Clean isn't everything - most styles benefit from good yeast characters - but I'd have preferred that to what I got.

Anyone tried Cooper's, by the way? Haven't tried it since my first batch. Nothing good to say about that, either.

*Friends shouldn't let friends use this yeast.

Who is this freakin' new guy thinkin' he knows everything?














Welcome back Kai.

I do have to disagree though...I think S-05 (formerly s-56) is one of the cleanest yeasts I've ever used. I think nottingham is pretty clean too.

 

[mr x]

I find Nottingham excellent. I just cracked a keg of pale ale made with Nottingham that went to 82 degrees on the first day. Tastes fantastic.

 

[Kai]

Welcome back Kai.

I do have to disagree though...I think S-05 (formerly s-56) is one of the cleanest yeasts I've ever used. I think nottingham is pretty clean too.

Haven't seen Safale at my little Halifax LHBS.

Considering the number of experts I see here who like dry yeast, I think I must have been doing something wrong. I'll have to give it another try, with better technique, and see how it turns out. I'm still skeptical, though, that I'll ever choose a clean dry yeast over, say, Wyeast's 1968 Fuller's for my ESB.

Thanks for the welcome. It's good to be back - this time, with an MLT.

 

[mr x]

I order my 05 from the States. You may want to try 04 in place of 1968 sometime. You can get that locally.

 

[APendejo]

I'm not all that experienced, but I have yet to get a 'clean' profile from dry yeasts. The only batches I've made that have blown me away were made with Wyeast. I haven't gotten around to doing a side-by-side yet, but every beer I've made with Nottingham has had a distinct, funky, gross-ester-and-dirty-fermentation taste. I'm learning more every day about proper aeration, pitching rates, fermentation temps, etc, but even a recent APA I made with Nottingham for a friend* has this foul yeast profile. Clean isn't everything - most styles benefit from good yeast characters - but I'd have preferred that to what I got.

Anyone tried Cooper's, by the way? Haven't tried it since my first batch. Nothing good to say about that, either.

*Friends shouldn't let friends use this yeast.

Hmmmm..... I have never had any of the problems you describe with any of the dry yeasts I use. Must be something else going on there with your process. Too high fermentation temps possibly?
AP

 

[Kevin Dean]

Are there reasons to use liquid yeast? Absolutely! Specialty strains are only available in liquid form. But...S-04, US-05, Nottingham, and Saflager (among many others) are EXCELLENT choices if you're brewing something that is fairly yeast-neutral in flavor.

It's all about using the best tool for the best job. Now, I know the OP (Yuri) is a GNU/Linux user, now... how to convince the rest of the world.

 

[thndrdad]

Safale 04 has never let me down and makes a super compact cake:rockin:

 

[sleepystevenson]

I have always used liquid yeast from White Labs, but this thread is definitely convincing me to try the dry. Anyone have a list of sorts that would tell you which drys are best for certain styles?? I mostly make straightforward styles anyway, such as pale ales, stouts, etc. Those liquid yeasts are just so nicely labeled that it makes it easy to choose the right one!!

 

[Yuri_Rage]

Sleepy - sounds like you ought to find yourself some Nottingham and US-05. Those are pretty "standard" American ale strains. They ferment clean and fast with good flocculation, and they tolerate a wide range of temperatures.