I think of "clean" as little or no flavor contribution from the yeast. One would use a clean yeast where the flavor of hops and/or malt are preferred to be dominant.I don't want to deflect this topic, it is far too important for that, but I'm British and choose yeast for what they might give to a beer, so would anyone care to help me understand what "Clean" describes about a yeast's characteristic?
I also get good results with S-04 & US-05.US-05 has always worked fine for me. But I like S-04 as well, might want to try that. It was metioned above that it presented tart, but I'd more descibe as clean and dry with the grain bills I usually use. It seems to have slightly higher attenuation rate than US-05.
I have tried US-05 side by side in a split batch with both wlp001 and Wyeast 1056. The liquid yeasts were way better in both cases. Did not like the US05 at all. My wife said it tasted more like “home brew” lol. I can’t put my finger on why but I had to agree. Split batches were treated identically other than having slightly different fermentation schedules and temps according to manufactures recommendations. It did improve some with age though, but still not as good.
Or some people taste things differently, im no rookie to using us05 never said it doesn’t produce good beer it sure does, i was asking if people experience tartness from it like i do , more of a discussion about the character it produces not a us05 bashing post, you love us05? Great! Thats all that mattersI also get good results with S-04 & US-05.
'Forum wisdom' regarding typical off flavors in dry yeast is beginning to feel a lot like 'extract darker than expected'.
People occasionally comment about it first hand, but seem to be unwilling to share full recipes and brew day data - which would be useful for additional troubleshooting and test batch brewing.
Given the amount information presented here, in a court of law, it's plausible that the complaint would be dismissed due to lack of evidence LOL (and perhaps with prejudice ).
"US-05: you are free to continue to make beer that delights people through out the world".
I am gonna switch my dry house yeast to something different
Its not a unexpected flavor, every single beer i brew with us05 has it and i dont think its a problem, its perfectly fine just not what i wantback in #3, you mentioned
which is fine.
If you're still looking for a deeper explanation of the unexpected flavor, more information will be needed to assist in identifying some possible causes. In the mean time,
"US-05: you are free to continue to make beer that delights people through out the world".
Have you tried building up US05 in a stepped starter from a small amount of dry yeast? I know, it is not especially handy, but this would actually shine some light on the dry yeast controversial.Its not a unexpected flavor, every single beer i brew with us05 has it and i dont think its a problem, its perfectly fine just not what i want
Go free us05 and continue to do what you do people love you but i just like ya a little bit
In the 2017 - 2019 timeframe, over in AHA forums, there was discussion where people reported better results with re-pitches of some dry ale yeast strains.My personal thought is, that dry yeast is too stressed from the drying process to perform as good as it could during the first generation. Following generations did not face that drying stress, so these should yield optimum results, if what I think is true.
Good idea!In the 2017 - 2019 timeframe, over in AHA forums, there was discussion where people reported better results with re-pitches of some dry ale yeast strains.
A split batch using a single package of yeast (one half sprinkled or rehydrated, the other half with a starter) would be interesting. Having common (or at least well documented) for processes rehydrating and making the starter would help others reproduce the 'experiment'.
Has anyone purposely underpitched US-05? If so what flavor difference did you notice? Completion time, etc.. I remember someone posting on a different thread about using only one package regardless of the SG. Then just waiting it out.
Took a gravity reading today and fermentation is near complete. Tasted the sample and it was tart like the previous batch. Safe to say the tartness is not from carbonic acid for my batches. I suspect I never tasted it in other batches because I was masking the flavor with more malt and hops. Nothing scientific here, just trying to rule things out.I brewed a 5 gal. batch of Cream of Three Crops in April with US-05 and it was definitely tart. Mellowed a bit with age, but it's still there. I just brewed another batch last week and it's still in the fermenter. I lowered the lactic acid in this batch because I think I mashed too low last time. I'm interested to see how this one turns out.
The tartness did decrease as the prior batch aged but never completely went away.I often taste tartness in green beer. I do not know why, but later on, it is gone.
lactic acid
Hmm. I have boosted a couple lack luster sour's in the past with the tiniest dose of lactic acid and it really made a difference sour wise at first, but faded to a more fake not earned kettle sour "sour" with time. Any time I add acid for PH reasons I always use phosphoric just for the exact reason that I don't want to sour unintentionally.FWIW, there are brewers who prefer phosphoric acid over lactic acid for mash pH adjustments. IIRC, the 'flavor descriptors' they used didn't match exactly with the 'flavor descriptors' the are being used here. Maybe it's a combination thing: acid choice + malts + yeast.
In your case, are you doing anything on brew day to adjust the water pH, or to adjust water chemistry?Adding my 2 cents as I have just recently used US 05 in back to back beers. l was surprised that the pH finished at 4.0 for both, which is lower than what I typically get. Seemed to play well in the American Wheat but can definitely pick up a twang in the APA that I don’t really care for. My hypothesis is that it is the low pH that I am picking up as the twang.
APA was mashed with 1.5% acid malt and distilled water treated with CaCl. That got me to a mash pH of 5.2 that dropped to 5.1 post boil. Same mash approach for the wheat resulting in a 5.5 mash pH, treated with 10ml/11.5L 10% phosphoric post boil for a 5.3pH in the fermenter. So nothing crazy low.In your case, are you doing anything on brew day to adjust the water pH, or to adjust water chemistry?
I think “twang” can be found anywhere, I honestly dont even think its a “flaw” more of a subjective experience thing, some people pick things up while others dont, maybe the ones that do are the odd ones out with us05 Im one of thoseGotta say I've been moderately curious about this alleged "twang" thing with US-05.
Mostly because I never experienced that character and I've used quite a bit of US-05 over the years.
And fwiw, one can find a "twang" badge frequently pinned to S04 as well. .
I wager there's a crapton of commercial brews using bricks of US-05...
Cheers!
I went through a small phase earlier this year where I wanted to see for myself whether I could switch to dry and stop messing with starters. What I found was it’s hard to compare yeasts. Different temps, fermentations schedules, pitch rates, characteristics, etc. But after 4 mediocre batches of dry, I quit. All liquid yeast batches came out good.Interesting. What did you do as far as the pitch rate for the batches? Direct pitch or with a starter? What size batches and gravity? What style beer?
I have used 1056 and 001 a lot over the years, but never in a side by side. I have been moving mostly to dry yeast over the past year or two, and I have made some excellent IPAs and Pale Ales with US-05 (including a recent silver medal for an IPA made with US-05). I have played around with a few other dry yeasts for hoppy beers (BRY-97 and M36/Liberty Bell...a recent Pale Ale with Notty), but keep finding I like Chico/US-05 the best. A split batch with 001 vs 1056 vs US-05 might be fun.
I actually really liked the way that Pale Ale with Nottingham turned out. It was a 100% Simcoe and it is a bit hard to pick out what flavors are from the yeast vs the hops. Fermentation finished faster than I would expect with US-05.
I know of one big brewery in CT that uses bricks of US-05. I got to chat with the owner/head brewer, and he said they use it a lot.Gotta say I've been moderately curious about this alleged "twang" thing with US-05.
Mostly because I never experienced that character and I've used quite a bit of US-05 over the years.
And fwiw, one can find a "twang" badge frequently pinned to S04 as well. .
I wager there's a crapton of commercial brews using bricks of US-05...
Cheers!
Updated recipe if you're interested:When I started brewing I read about US-05 being the most common homebrewers yeast. I was mainly after the neipa whale, so I never used it, except for 1 stout, which I have since brewed with S-04. (I like the less clean S-04 for the stout.)
Last year I made a West Coat Pale and decided to try WLP001. Enjoyed it immensely and re-brewed it last month with US-05. It's literally one of the cleanest and best home brews I've produced. Fermented at 68, and it smells and tastes just like a commercial beer. 2 Row, a little Vienna and Crystal 20. I've since tweaked it to get a bit more malt backbone and higher IBU, but damn is it tasty. I don't get any tartness whatsoever. Can't wait to use it again. LOVE not making starters.
I taste tartness in almost every green net right or of the fermenter. After bottle conditioning, it is usually gone.Just adding to this conversation. I've been experimenting with US-05 this year. I brewed an Amber ale earlier in the year and noticed a subtle tart/sweetness in the beer. I might say it was cider like, but just barely. Because I had two brews going and my fermentation chamber was full I let the Amber ferment in the basement where the ambient temp was around 64. The mash temp was 150. I had read about US-05's peachy flavors I assumed the flavors were due to a low ferm temp. The beer was still quite good, I was just not excited about the slight tart flavor.
More recently I brewed a Cream of Three crops batch and since I was using 05 again I kept the fermentation temp up around 67. Mash temp was 152. I noticed the tartness again, stronger than in the Amber, but I assumed this was due to the less robust flavors of Three crops VS an Amber ale.
I'm now trying some similar recipes with M44 and Nottingham to see if I notice the flavors there. I did a few brews with liquid yeast in between (Irish Red w/ Omega OYL-005 and another Amber with OYL- 004) and did not notice the tarntess in either of these brews.
Maybe as @MHBT mentioned, it's just something about my taster that picks up the tartness. Others who try the beers like them and are not that aware of the tartness unless I mention it.
Hmmm
Ditto. This is the taste of tiny amounts of yeast that haven't settled out yet.I taste tartness in almost every green net right or of the fermenter. After bottle conditioning, it is usually gone.
Same here. I fermented a cream ale & an APA this year with it @ 65-68 and very clean flavor.What temp are you fermenting at?
There seems to be a bit of a mentality shift on HBT regarding US-05. In the past, people almost always insisted keeping it below 66-68 because of the flavor profile. As of recent I seem to see people talk about how forgiving it is 68+. I’m not sure what’s driven the change but I’m in the below 68 camp. I ferment it in the mid 60’s and find I clean and enjoyable.
That's because there are so many other factors than just the yeast. We are definitely not all brewing the same!I swear every yeast strain has been described by someone on this board as having every type of off-flavor at some point or another. The consensus is there is no consensus.
I've used US-05 a lot, I usually ferment at 65 (fermenter wall temp), and I primarily use it in APA and IPA. I haven't noticed tart, I get expected attenuation, and it takes a long time to flocc out compared to other yeasts I use a lot
Enter your email address to join: