Yeast for NEIPA (London ale III vs Omega DIPA ale)

[Lele]

Hi everybody
I want to make a NEIPA, but I don't know if is better to use London ale III (Wyeast 1318) or Omega DIPA ale. Do you have some experience with these two yeasts? Which is better for a NEIPA? What are their flavor?
Thanks

 

[boomerbrian]

I have always used Vermont for NEIPA. A lot of people use Vermont and London. I don't have any experience with the Omega.

 

[Lele]

Unfortunately I can buy only the Omega or London III. Anybody can help me?

 

[boomerbrian]

London III is a great yeast for NEIPA. From what I have seen it is the most common used for that style.

 

[ILMSTMF]

I used 1318 in a NEIPA I brewed last year, turned out great. Can't speak for the Omega variety but I'd expect it to be good.

 

[Lele]

Does anyone have any experience with Omega DIPA?

 

[Brew_G]

Unfortunately I can buy only the Omega or London III. Anybody can help me?

I don't know anything about Omega, but I do know that the house yeast for one of the most popular breweries in Northern VA - one brewing incredibly high-quality NE-style IPAs - is London Ale III (or variant).

With that in mind, and the fact that so many homebrewers use it as their yeast of choice, I can't imagine you'd go wrong with it.

 

[Rob2010SS]

I just pitched Omega DIPA (OYL-052) in my NEIPA I brewed this weekend. The guys at the LHBS recommended it over the 1318 simply due to the fact that I wasn't doing a starter and the Omega has a higher cell count. I think you'd be fine either way you go. 1318 seems to be a more common choice but the DIPA is the conan strain, so either one would work in my opinion. The one thing I did notice about the Omega was that it was a slow starter, but man is it roaring now. Took about 30 hours to see any sign of fermentation but now, after doing my first dry hop, looks like brains!

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Hi everybody
I want to make a NEIPA, but I don't know if is better to use London ale III (Wyeast 1318) or Omega DIPA ale. Do you have some experience with these two yeasts? Which is better for a NEIPA? What are their flavor?
Thanks

There's no "better", just "different" - both 1318 and the Conan family (which includes the Omega DIPA) are used to make well-regarded commercial NEIPAs. If you search on "1318 versus Conan" you'll get lots of opinions. In general Conan strains (they're all a bit different) give a slightly more punchy fruit flavour but perhaps a bit more 1-dimensional, whereas 1318 is a bit more restrained but more complex. It depends what kind of thing you're going for.

It's also worth mentioning that some people in the Tree House thread here have been using S-04/T-58/WB-06 dry yeasts in blends of around 84:10:6 and reported results that are as good as or perhaps even better than 1318/Conan. Umm - "preferred" is probably the right word rather than "better".

 

[Lele]

OK, thank you very much for the answers. Maybe I will try with the Omega because it's the easiest for me to find. But I was uncertain because it's the less popular. But if you say it's a good choice for a NEIPA, I will try it. Thank you very much

 

[fourfarthing]

I have pitched both the Conan and 1318 in the same wort and gotten solid results. The Conan appears to attenuate more and take the FG lower, so pay attention to that when designing the grain bill.

 

[boomerbrian]

I didn’t realize the omega was the Conan strain. Conan is very popular choice for NEIPA. Should turn out great

 

[Dcpcooks]

Does anyone have any experience with Omega DIPA?

Yes I've used it several times. Started at 64 ramped to 68 for the last few days.

I pitch 2.0 b cells per 5 gallons.

Played nicely with mosaic and citra. Good body and nice fruity esters. I got some citrus out of it. I think you'll enjoy it

 

[ProblemChild]

I have used the Omega a number of times. It performs well for my midcoast IPA's (tons of after boil hops, not hazy, not a juice bomb and does not make your face cave in with the bitterness). It adds a bit of a stone fruit flavor at the right fermentation temps ,but really allows a grainy or bready malt come through. Pearl and pilsner malts shine well. Vienna is a great character malt with it. So is flaked barley.

1318 is great in its own right, but it is more assertive with its esters as far as I am concerned. It is smoother and juicer.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

OK, thank you very much for the answers. Maybe I will try with the Omega because it's the easiest for me to find. But I was uncertain because it's the less popular. But if you say it's a good choice for a NEIPA, I will try it. Thank you very much

Conan is the yeast that NEIPAs built their reputation on, but then some breweries discovered that they preferred 1318. Up to you - you certainly shouldn't go too far wrong with either.

@boomerbrian It's a bit more complicated now as the "Conan" strains from different suppliers seem to behave slightly differently to one another, which is why I talked of a Conan "family" earlier, they're not all the same. I don't know where the Omega version fits on the spectrum.

 

[jready]

In my opinion 1318 is a little more reliable. I can build a huge starter with it end up with 4 ball jars of yeast then build those up with no issues. I did not have as good of success with Conan but it may have been my source.

 

[Sbe2]

1318 is great, never had experience with Omega DIPA.

I have been using just S-04 on my latest NEIPAs and they are at the top if my list. Sprinkle one pack after oxiginating my wort. That way I don't gave to make a starter from harvested yeast the night before.

 

[Germainium]

I know I'm late to this post, but I'll share my use with both. I'll also preface I've only brewed about 10 batches, but feel I've made some good NEIPAs.

I've used London III in 4 and Omega DIPA in 1. Considering I was testing different grain bills and hops, I had a relatively standard process for mashing, hop schedule, and fermentation (incl. temps). What I found was that there was a very minimal difference in the flavors I was able to detect, yeast alone. I actually started another thread about why I felt my beers were tasting very similar despite hop differences, which I presume is from the yeast, and even across the Omega and London III. I kegged so I wasn't able to compare side by side, but definitely felt similar across each batch.

Overall, both provided great fruity flavors and mixed well with the hops. For 2.5 gallon batches, I did not use a starter for either, and had no issues with each taking off. My notes and recipes are below from brewersfriend if you're interested at all.

https://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/519394/neipa2
https://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/534591/orange-haze-neipa
https://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/501032/beyond-the-stars-ne-ipa
https://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/486851/freezing-runway-model-neipa-
https://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/564906/trillium-ddh-stillings-street-clone (Omega)

 

[day_trippr]

fwiw, I split a 10 gallon batch of the Julius clone ("As Seen On HBT") between Imperial A04 Conan and wy1318.
I've used a ton of ranched A04 but it turns out I prefer the 1318 for neipa recipes.
Both finished with the same FG, they're both delicious, but the 1318 half is smoother mid-palette and noticeably maltier than the Conan half...

Cheers!

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

I'm a 1318 guy. I've brewed a bunch of NEIPAs with it that have all turned out fantastic. I see zero reason to use anything else for that style.

 

[cpham574]

In my opinion 1318 is a little more reliable. I can build a huge starter with it end up with 4 ball jars of yeast then build those up with no issues. I did not have as good of success with Conan but it may have been my source.

How big of a starter do you make to have 4 mason jars worth?

 

[jready]

How big of a starter do you make to have 4 mason jars worth?

I build up to a 2L starter

 

[Germainium]

In my opinion 1318 is a little more reliable. I can build a huge starter with it end up with 4 ball jars of yeast then build those up with no issues. I did not have as good of success with Conan but it may have been my source.

Are you building that starter and splitting in 4 jars for future use? I just bought a 2L starter kit and am looking to do this.

 

[cpham574]

I build up to a 2L starter

So you first build a 2l starter then split that into 4 mason jars then build each of those back up to a 2l when you’re ready to use them?

 

[micraftbeer]

Dead thread, but I'm interested in the answer to this question as well.

 

[wepeeler]

Depends on the age of the smackpack and the OG of your wort.

If you're looking to harvest yeast, this is helpful: http://www.brewunited.com/yeast_calculator.php

Enter in all the info on your yeast, volume and estimated OG, and the hard calculations are done for you. It gives you how much dme to use and starter volumes depending on the size of your flask. Harvesting is more easily done in a 5L flask. Usually a 1.5L starter is suffice for a moderate OG beer. BUT to harvest 100 billion cells, you'd need a 2L starter, which is too much volume for a 2L starter. So you could build up that 1.5L starter by using a stir plate for 24 hours, cold crash 24 hours, decant most of the liquid and repitch boiled and cooled dme. That's too much work for me, so I bought a 5L flask. I can make a 2.5L starter right out of the gate, cold crash, decant .6L into a mason jar, which I can then later use to make a starter for another batch. Make another 2.5L starter, save .6L rinse, repeat. (The 5L flask also works great when I make 11 gallon batches needing a bigger starter. And for lagers!)

This is valuable info as well: http://brulosophy.com/methods/yeast-harvesting/