Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => Yeast and Fermentation => Topic started by: mnstorm99 on June 01, 2010, 12:21:37 pm

Title: Denny's Favorite
Post by: mnstorm99 on June 01, 2010, 12:21:37 pm
Hey all (and Denny),

I haven't used this yeast yet, and plan on doing a Peach Ale (Blonde Ale recipe) this weekend.  What are your thoughts on using this yeast for a beer like this.  Also I always use my yeast for 2-3 beers (I am a cheap a$$, and think it's fun to plan out batches based on the yeast I have on hand), but with the peaches in the fermenter what effect might it have on my next batch?  I am thinking if there is just a touch of peach, it might be nice for an IPA.
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: denny on June 01, 2010, 03:32:03 pm
Frankly, it wouldn't be my first choice for a blonde ale becasue of the full mouthfeel.  Generally, I prefer blonde ales a little "thinner".  OTOH, it certainly wouldn't be bad, either.  Give it plenty of time.  If you add the peaches to the secondary, you can harvest the primary yeast w/o any peach flavor.
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: blatz on June 01, 2010, 03:39:04 pm
Frankly, it wouldn't be my first choice for a blonde ale becasue of the full mouthfeel.  Generally, I prefer blonde ales a little "thinner". 

+1 - even my APA with Denny's, it seems a little too full - I'd imagine the same result on blonde.  This yeast really shines in IPAs, Porters and Stouts, IMO, where the fuller mouthfeel is complementary, or in the former, where it allows you to pack in more hops.

lighter beers where more crispness is desired lend themselves better to 001/US-05.

All strictly in my opinion - I wouldn't hesitate to make a blonde with it, esp if I were growing it up for something bigger  ;)
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: mnstorm99 on June 01, 2010, 04:15:50 pm
Well, I don't ever really secondary, but maybe I would on this...but then again I thought a peach touch might go well with some amarillo   ;D

Would I be able to try and get a bit crisper (I wouldn't mind a bit of mouthfeel to it with the fruit) beer with a low mash temp or some sucrose?
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: denny on June 01, 2010, 05:44:09 pm
Would I be able to try and get a bit crisper (I wouldn't mind a bit of mouthfeel to it with the fruit) beer with a low mash temp or some sucrose?

Yep, either or both of those would work.
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: bluesman on June 01, 2010, 05:58:25 pm
I finally tried 1450 with an IPA. I was impressed with the performance. It rendered a nice silky mouthfeel and and allowed the hops to shine through with a pleasant supporting malt presence. I will make more!
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: kylekohlmorgen on June 08, 2010, 04:29:54 pm
I've got 1450 working on an Amber right now. Actually, its pretty close to the "Waldo Lake" recipe, I just swapped the 2-row for Maris Otter.

I'll give updates, but it smells GREAT out of the airlock!
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: The Rabid Brewer on June 10, 2010, 11:48:40 pm
Personally, I haven't been too happy with this strain. I've tried it now on both on an APA and on DC's own Rye IPA.

For the APA, I split a batch and did both 1450 and WLP001. 1450 finished at 77% ADF at 1.013 while WLP001 went to 80% ADF at 1.011.  At just over 2 weeks, 1450 was still cloudy while WLP001 was quite clear. 1450 had some fruity esters, was a bit tart and a tad sweeter.

This particular beer was meant to be a drier, dry-hopped APA, so I thought the clean flavor and slightly higher attenuation of the WLP001 worked much better. I noted the WLP001 actually had a more prominent malt flavor (because the esters didn't get in the way) and was certainly a bit crisper. The 1450 had more mouthfeel, but I don't think it worked for this beer.

So, now that I knew what to expect, I wanted to try the yeast again, so what better beer than Denny's own Rye? I built up a 4L starter, chilled and decanted before pitching and the yeast still stopped at only 70% ADF. I ended up krausening with WLP001 to drop it another 3 or 4 points.

I'll definitely try it again sometime, but so far, not having great results....

Brian
Title: Re: Denny's Favorite
Post by: bluesman on June 11, 2010, 12:47:11 pm
Personally, I haven't been too happy with this strain. I've tried it now on both on an APA and on DC's own Rye IPA.

For the APA, I split a batch and did both 1450 and WLP001. 1450 finished at 77% ADF at 1.013 while WLP001 went to 80% ADF at 1.011.  At just over 2 weeks, 1450 was still cloudy while WLP001 was quite clear. 1450 had some fruity esters, was a bit tart and a tad sweeter.

This particular beer was meant to be a drier, dry-hopped APA, so I thought the clean flavor and slightly higher attenuation of the WLP001 worked much better. I noted the WLP001 actually had a more prominent malt flavor (because the esters didn't get in the way) and was certainly a bit crisper. The 1450 had more mouthfeel, but I don't think it worked for this beer.

So, now that I knew what to expect, I wanted to try the yeast again, so what better beer than Denny's own Rye? I built up a 4L starter, chilled and decanted before pitching and the yeast still stopped at only 70% ADF. I ended up krausening with WLP001 to drop it another 3 or 4 points.

I'll definitely try it again sometime, but so far, not having great results....

Brian

I found similiar results with my IPA. The 1450 doesn't attenuate quite as well as S05 or WLP001, but being an EC guy...I like the increased mouthfeel, slightly more esters and a little sweetness. If you want the hops to shine through more...go with S05, WLP001 or another Chico strain. If you want some supporting malt in your IPA...1450 is the better yeast.