Top 5 Dry Yeasts?

[dmtaylor]

dmtaylor above answered your question exactly as I would have answered, I think I've seen reports he mentions on this very forum.

Regarding the difference between the yeasts, you aren't kidding yourself, they are slightly different indeed. That's true for each and every yeast Mangrove Jack source from Lallemand. Their matching pairs (Nottingham/M42, Köln/M54, Windsor/M15, London/M10, Abbey/M47 etc.) are recognisably similar yet slightly different flavourwise, probably because MJ do not just repack but also blend their yeasts. To my liking, MJ's versions always taste a bit better.

Maybe they really do know what they are doing, making custom blends. Maybe none of them are pure equivalents, but only partial. I myself ain't pulling out a microscope to know for sure.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

probably because MJ do not just repack but also blend their yeasts

If some/many/most/all MJ yeasts are blends, would that have an impact on re-pitching or making a starter?

 

[dmtaylor]

If some/many/most/all MJ yeasts are blends, would that have an impact on re-pitching or making a starter?

It could indeed. Any yeast salespeople who know anything about anything will always tell you "oh you should never repitch, you need to buy new every time for the best consistency". Not just because it's true, which it is, but because they'll sell more yeast that way!!!

 

[Protos]

I tried harvesting and repitching with most of the Mangrove's yeast range. Noticed that many behaved quite inconsistently after repitching, so yeah, those were most probably blends.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I tried harvesting and repitching with most of the Mangrove's yeast range. Noticed that many behaved quite inconsistently after repitching, so yeah, those were most probably blends.

Which MJ strains were you successful with? which MJ strains behaved inconsistently?

 

[Oleson M.D.]

It could indeed. Any yeast salespeople who know anything about anything will always tell you "oh you should never repitch, you need to buy new every time for the best consistency". Not just because it's true, which it is, but because they'll sell more yeast that way!!!

Please help! We harvest our yeast with every batch. The yeast continues to perform very well, actually improving up through the 3rd or 4th harvest, and then it reaches it's peak performance. Regarding consistency, the yeast slurries are very consistent.

Wyeast has some info on their website about harvesting yeast, what to do, and what not to do.

Do you not harvest yeast?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

@Oleson M.D. : MJ, in their product information (link to page with PDF download), has this section

It's their recommendation.

It could be a good starting point for understanding their strains of yeast.

Some people report mixed results when not following the recommendation.

We harvest our yeast with every batch

What strains are you using?

 

[McMullan]

Once hydrated, dry yeast become wet yeast. If performance declines when repitching there's something wrong with the harvesting/repitching procedures or the yeast or both. It's known that dry brewer's yeast tend to perform better after repitching generation 1-2. The dry yeast cells at gen0 are adapted to commercial drying conditions, not to being molly-coddled by brewers. Beer from the first fermentation (with gen0 yeast) is usually blended, commercially, to maintain a level of consistency, because it's considered to be inferior compared with subsequent beers fermented by repitched wet yeast adapted to ferment brewery worts. My own observations fail to disprove this wisdom. The idea more consistency is achieved by pitching dry gen0 yeast every time is little more than marketing speil, I'm afraid. I suspect MJ's advice - if valid and not just sales motivated - has more to do with iffy repackaging procedures. That's not to say commercial yeast drying processes are necessarily consistent.

 

[dmtaylor]

Please help! We harvest our yeast with every batch. The yeast continues to perform very well, actually improving up through the 3rd or 4th harvest, and then it reaches it's peak performance. Regarding consistency, the yeast slurries are very consistent.

Wyeast has some info on their website about harvesting yeast, what to do, and what not to do.

Do you not harvest yeast?

I do in fact harvest yeast. My comments above were somewhat facetious, spoken from the perspective of a yeast vendor. If you enjoy the results of subsequent batches from the same yeast as I do, then don't change a thing.

 

[schmurf]

Lallemand says Nottingham could be repitched just like any other yeast, but wort should be areated before repitching.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Over the years, AHA forums have had numerous interesting topics on re-pitching Nottingham, US-05, S-04, ...

 

[HopSing]

I suggest adding Omega Lutra to the dry yeasts to try, especially during the warmer months if you don't have temperature control. I was a fan of the liquid Lutra for this reason and I'm a fan of the dry Lutra. The dry Lutra is easier to ship, store, and lasts a year or two in the right conditions (in the refrigerator) and costs a little less too, depending on where you shop.

I harvested and split the gen 0 batch slurry into 4 pint sized jars and have re-pitched 3 of the 4. It's off and running within 4 hours of pitch at 75F. Done in 4 to 5 days if you're in a rush to keg / bottle, but it drops clearer if you give it a full 2 weeks. Results are great each time. I brought the liquid Lutra 3 generations deep without any perceivable variations after 20 or so batches. I'm sure the dry will perform the same.

~HopSing.

 

[Oleson M.D.]

Lallemand says Nottingham could be repitched just like any other yeast, but wort should be areated before repitching.

I think it’s important to aerate the yeast slurry, more so than the wort. I have seen TV shows where the commercial brewers literally took a 5 gallon pail of yeast, and poured it back and forth between two buckets to induce O2.

Our wort picks up O2 during the run off.

 

[DBhomebrew]

I think it’s important to aerate the yeast slurry, more so than the wort. I have seen TV shows where the commercial brewers literally took a 5 gallon pail of yeast, and poured it back and forth between two buckets to induce O2.

Our wort picks up O2 during the run off.

Sounds similar to a Shaken, Not Stirred starter.

 

[McMullan]

I think it’s important to aerate the yeast slurry, more so than the wort.

Trick is to ensure the yeast cells are active before applying O2 in regular bursts for an hour or two on brew day.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/threads/shaken-not-stirred-advice.698288/#post-9274945

 

[AlexKay]

Once hydrated, dry yeast become wet yeast. If performance declines when repitching there's something wrong with the harvesting/repitching procedures or the yeast or both. It's known that dry brewer's yeast tend to perform better after repitching generation 1-2. The dry yeast cells at gen0 are adapted to commercial drying conditions, not to being molly-coddled by brewers. Beer from the first fermentation (with gen0 yeast) is usually blended, commercially, to maintain a level of consistency, because it's considered to be inferior compared with subsequent beers fermented by repitched wet yeast adapted to ferment brewery worts. My own observations fail to disprove this wisdom. The idea more consistency is achieved by pitching dry gen0 yeast every time is little more than marketing speil, I'm afraid. I suspect MJ's advice - if valid and not just sales motivated - has more to do with iffy repackaging procedures. That's not to say commercial yeast drying processes are necessarily consistent.

My understanding is that beer from the first fermentation (with gen0 yeast) is usually blended, commercially, to maintain a level of consistency ... because it's different, but not because it is necessarily inferior. The counterexample is Gordon Biersch, which only uses gen-0 yeast.

 

[McMullan]

My understanding is that beer from the first fermentation (with gen0 yeast) is usually blended, commercially, to maintain a level of consistency ... because it's different, but not because it is necessarily inferior. The counterexample is Gordon Biersch, which only uses gen-0 yeast.

Nope, it's described as inferior compared with subsequent brews fermented with repitched yeast. And my observations to date support it. If you study brewing science in the UK that's what you'll be taught and what you'll practice as a professional brewer. Mainly because that's what has been determined empirically by those who have bothered to consider it. Contrarianism is such a weak position, at best.

 

[Oleson M.D.]

There are many commercial breweries that harvest yeast for use in the next brew.

Hoffbrau Brewery in Munich harvests the yeast until the 4th generation.

 

[GoodTruble]

Okay, thread has been officially hijacked.

It was my fault. I accept all responsibility. And I respectfully request we return to "5 Best Dry Yeasts" for future references sake. And start a "Dry Yeast Dopplegangers and Harvesting" thread elsewhere. (Just a suggestion).

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

HomeBrewTalk: making active dry yeast complicated since 2019.

eta: oops, missed what @GoodTruble suggested.

 

[Oleson M.D.]

Okay, thread has been officially hijacked.

It was my fault. I accept all responsibility. And I respectfully request we return to "5 Best Dry Yeasts" for future references sake. And start a "Dry Yeast Dopplegangers and Harvesting" thread elsewhere. (Just a suggestion).

The best dry yeasts are not dry at all. They are the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. generation of the yeast.

Our House Lager: Diamond

Our House Ale: S-04

 

[AlexKay]

Nope, it's described as inferior compared with subsequent brews fermented with repitched yeast. And my observations to date support it. If you study brewing science in the UK that's what you'll be taught and what you'll practice as a professional brewer. Mainly because that's what has been determined empirically by those who have bothered to consider it. Contrarianism is such a weak position, at best.

Vague appeals to authority, flavored with ad hominem attacks. I honestly don’t know why I replied.

 

[Protos]

Which MJ strains were you successful with? which MJ strains behaved inconsistently?

Well, from my experience of repitching various MJ yeasts, I divide them into three categories.
Most of the yeasts, I repitched multiple times in different conditions.

Mangrove Jack's yeasts that are likely to retain their flavour character in subsequent generations:
M36, M42, M41, M47, M20

Mangrove Jack's yeasts that are prone to changing their flavour character in subsequent generations:
M15 (loss of signature dark fruit flavour), M29 (loss of much of the phenolic character), M31 (acquiring prominent phenolic character), M54 (acquiring strong pear ester)

Mangrove Jack's yeasts that usually change their flavour character AND fermentation kinetics in subsequent generations:
M21 and M10 (secondary spontaneous re-fermentations after 2-3 weeks are frequent).

YMMV.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Thanks @Protos !

Hopefully others with experience re-pitching MJ strains will share their experiences with specific strains.

(FWIW, I'm still a sprinkle it on top, one-and-done dry yeast user. Eventually, re-pitching may become a serious interest and a priority - but for now, I just appreciate the insights that you and others provide. ).

 

[Protos]

(FWIW, I'm still a sprinkle it on top, one-and-done dry yeast user.

I'd suggest staying that way, if you can. For me, there's nothing fun or interesting in harvesting and repitching yeasts. I do that just to cut the costs, which I have to, because my incomes are far behind my brewing frequency, volume and scope. If I had yeasts for free, I'd ferment all my beers exclusively with the generation 0, which is always the best, and just dump those sloppy ugly slurries down the gurgler, instead of saving and reusing them.

Every time you repitch you add a risk into your process, and sometimes it does strike, however meticulous you are with your sanitation regimen. Ruining the meager savings you hoped to earn from reusing your yeasts.

 

[McMullan]

I'd suggest staying that way, if you can. For me, there's nothing fun or interesting in harvesting and repitching yeasts. I do that just to cut the costs, which I have to, because my incomes are far behind my brewing frequency, volume and scope. If I had yeasts for free, I'd ferment all my beers exclusively with the generation 0, which is always the best, and just dump those sloppy ugly slurries down the gurgler, instead of saving and reusing them.

Every time you repitch you add a risk into your process, and sometimes it does strike, however meticulous you are with your sanitation regimen. Ruining the meager savings you hoped to earn from reusing your yeasts.

If repitching's about cost it's because it's priceless - you can't buy the best fresh yeast to pitch, you have to collect it fresh and reuse as soon as.

 

[Protos]

That's true, yet I'm still to find a dry yeast that would improve past Gen. 0.
M54, maybe. The only exception I know.

The idea more consistency is achieved by pitching dry gen0 yeast every time is little more than marketing speil, I'm afraid.

That's what I think too. Using Gen.0, I can predict exactly what I'll get from the fermenter.
After that, it's more or less of a lottery. The beer may or may not come out like I expect.

 

[Red over White]

That's true, yet I'm still to find a dry yeast that would improve past Gen. 0.
M54, maybe. The only exception I know.


That's what I think too. Using Gen.0, I can predict exactly what I'll get from the fermenter.
After that, it's more or less of a lottery. The beer may or may not come out like I expect.

I like the first pitch of Verdant the best myself. A 500ml vitality starter with Verdant gives me 6-8 points in the first 24 hours with no oxygen or aeration and gives the best ester expression vs subsequent pitches on my gear and SOP.

 

[Oleson M.D.]

Dry Lager Yeast is very versatile. Diamond will ferment nicely at 62 - 64 degrees. And still retain lager character.

 

[moreb33rplz]

Huh, i've direct pitched dry, re-hydrated and pitched, and harvested anywhere from 2-5 generations and can't say I noticed any difference in any style of my beers. If you use a single strain of yeast and harvest it I'm curious how it would be different than simply pitching the same amount of yeast cells from a first generation (except for the fact it will be in a different state or stage of life).

With dry yeast being cheap, me being lazy, I now only re-use yeast for certain situations - rare yeast strains, or brewing a low gravity beer to then pitch a high gravity beer on top of.

Buuut back on topic:
- Diamond Lager
- S-04
- US-05
- Belle Saison
- 34/70

I'm a basic bitch