Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => Yeast and Fermentation => Topic started by: yso191 on May 07, 2017, 07:01:04 PM

Title: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: yso191 on May 07, 2017, 07:01:04 PM
I was planning to brew a Belgian Dark Strong tomorrow.  I found 2 expired (but just January) packs of yeast at one LHBS, and ordered two more from MoreBeer out of CA.  I paid extra for the 'cool pack'  because even though it is Spring, stuff happens.  The packs from CA arrived at ambient temperature.  No residual coolness at all.

So four packets... into a 1.038 starter wort.  Nothing.  Zip. Zero. Nada.

I've had it.  We have two LHBS's in Yakima.  Last Fall I had the same experience with yeast from the other LHBS, so I went back to the store with a thermometer and stuck it in their yeast 'fridge.'  27*!

Yeast costs way too much to be rolling the dice with dead packets.  Dry yeast it is.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 07, 2017, 07:43:48 PM
If there were all the a strains I wanted to use as dry, so would I.  Unfortunately that's not the case.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Frankenbrew on May 07, 2017, 07:55:49 PM
I use mostly dry yeast. But yeah, certain styles just aren't the same with dry yeast, so I take the chance every once in a long while to buy some liquid kolsch or biere de garde yeast.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 07, 2017, 08:07:40 PM
I use mostly dry yeast. But yeah, certain styles just aren't the same with dry yeast, so I take the chance every once in a long while to buy some liquid kolsch or biere de garde yeast.

I make mainly American styles and don't care for US-05 so I'm stuck.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Alewyfe on May 07, 2017, 09:36:44 PM
I've had brilliant success with Williams Brewing. Good Price, arrives cool, no extra charges necessary. Maybe give them a try.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: brewsumore on May 07, 2017, 09:47:12 PM
For me in Spokane when ordering from MoreBeer, I've found it helps to buy four ice packs for two packs of liquid yeast, and more in summer, and via online delivery notification be sure I can get home within about 15 minutes from time of delivery on my porch.  Shipping up here and coming from warm California, in my experience we need thermal protection that only extra ice packs can provide...usually.  That's worked for me without having to pay overnight shipping.
Title: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: BrewBama on May 07, 2017, 10:36:28 PM
I went to dry a while back. Like you I am tired of gambling with liquid. I can brew plenty of styles that keep me happy.

Denny -- have you tried a Bry-97? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: yso191 on May 08, 2017, 12:55:25 AM
If there were all the a strains I wanted to use as dry, so would I.  Unfortunately that's not the case.

That is true.  Nowhere can one find 1450 except in liquid form, and that is a great yeast.  But the range is getting greater all the time!  I think I'll go with Mangrove Jack's M31 Belgian tripel for tomorrow.  But that's assuming what I ordered will be there!
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: RC on May 08, 2017, 01:06:05 AM
"I was planning to brew a Belgian Dark Strong tomorrow.  I found 2 expired (but just January) packs of yeast at one LHBS, and ordered two more from MoreBeer out of CA.  I paid extra for the 'cool pack'  because even though it is Spring, stuff happens.  The packs from CA arrived at ambient temperature.  No residual coolness at all."

I live in the Sacramento area and order from MoreBeer all the time, from the Pittsburg, CA location you ordered from. Whenever I order liquid yeast from them I always pay for the cool pack thing. I always get the order the day after it ships because of how close I am, and the yeast and ice pack (even in the insulated envelope) have always been ambient temp. They have never been cold, or even slightly cool, upon receipt. I suspect they just slightly refrigerate the ice packs rather than freeze them, so that they warm up quickly. It's a bummer. So I try not to order yeast from MoreBeer. On the other hand, I also order a lot from Williams Brewing (in San Leandro, CA, same general area as MoreBeer). And from them, I always receive cold yeast, even if I order just the ice pack and not the warranty yeast-shipper thing. I'd go with Williams over MoreBeer if ordering liquid yeast.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Big Monk on May 08, 2017, 03:36:58 AM
As a brewer of primarily monastic inspired Belgian beers, dry yeast is no bueno


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 08, 2017, 02:29:50 PM
If there were all the a strains I wanted to use as dry, so would I.  Unfortunately that's not the case.

That is true.  Nowhere can one find 1450 except in liquid form, and that is a great yeast.  But the range is getting greater all the time!  I think I'll go with Mangrove Jack's M31 Belgian tripel for tomorrow.  But that's assuming what I ordered will be there!

It's surprising you don't have a good LHBS.  With all the beer activity in the area I would have thought it was a given.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: jrdatta on May 08, 2017, 03:01:52 PM
As a brewer of primarily monastic inspired Belgian beers, dry yeast is no bueno


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What about the fermentis Abbaye?  Reportedly good results if you under pitch it.  I have only used it as a re-yeast for bottling but was planning on splitting a batch of patersbier and comparing it to 3787.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: gman23 on May 08, 2017, 03:24:50 PM
I use mostly dry yeast. But yeah, certain styles just aren't the same with dry yeast, so I take the chance every once in a long while to buy some liquid kolsch or biere de garde yeast.

This is my approach as well. If there was a solid dry kolsch yeast out there I probably would use 100% dry yeast. It all comes down to what styles you brew. These days mine are mostly lagers, American ales, or some type of hybrid/non-traditional style

I primarily use 05, 34/70, and K97 but will use S04 and Belle Saison once a year or so.

When I do use liquid, I have grown quite fond of Imperial.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: erockrph on May 08, 2017, 04:16:27 PM
I use mostly dry yeast. But yeah, certain styles just aren't the same with dry yeast, so I take the chance every once in a long while to buy some liquid kolsch or biere de garde yeast.

This is my approach as well. If there was a solid dry kolsch yeast out there I probably would use 100% dry yeast. It all comes down to what styles you brew. These days mine are mostly lagers, American ales, or some type of hybrid/non-traditional style

I primarily use 05, 34/70, and K97 but will use S04 and Belle Saison once a year or so.

When I do use liquid, I have grown quite fond of Imperial.
Count me in the same camp. I don't have a LHBS with hours that work for my work and family schedule, plus a lot of my brew days are relatively short notice. I keep enough grain and hops on hand to throw together almost any recipe I'd want on short notice, and dry yeast keeps me covered on the yeast side as well.

I primarily use 34/70, US-05 and Belle Saison, plus 71B for mead and D47 for cider. I'll occasionally use S-04 and BRY-97. I also need to do more experimenting with Danstar's London ESB,

If I want to brew with a liquid yeast, I need to plan it out in advance and order onine.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: zwiller on May 08, 2017, 04:35:37 PM
Same here.  I am like 95% dry.  Now that most all of us would agree the dry is considered as good as liquid, I say it's just a matter of time before we get more dry strains.  Due to life and schedule I was "forced" to dry, boy what surprise!  Sure 05 worked fine but I tried with SO4 and had good results so on a whim I decided to try WB06 on a hefe and it was the game changer for me.  The key is to review the results of posters and see if the flavor profile matches what you are after.  IE WB06 is NOT a banana clove hefe yeast.  It is the apricot/vanilla bright type.  I did a NGP with 3470 at low 60s and it was fab as well.  (I am BJCP btw)

Abbaye all the way on that!  I suspect it is Rochefort.  I really wish someone would get a dry yeast origin chart going.  IE belle saison is 3711, SO4 is Whitbread, WB06 is 3638, etc. 

Note to self: start a US dry yeast company.  ;D
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: bayareabrewer on May 08, 2017, 04:36:14 PM
The yeast bay has new packaging that is a huge improvement from past types. Basically a mini Styrofoam cooler that your yeast comes in. Sorry about your dead yeast
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: narcout on May 08, 2017, 04:36:25 PM
So four packets... into a 1.038 starter wort.  Nothing.  Zip. Zero. Nada.

Did you check the gravity?  I've had starters ferment out overnight and look totally dead.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 08, 2017, 04:44:59 PM
Same here.  I am like 95% dry.  Now that most all of us would agree the dry is considered as good as liquid, I say it's just a matter of time before we get more dry strains.  Due to life and schedule I was "forced" to dry, boy what surprise!  Sure 05 worked fine but I tried with SO4 and had good results so on a whim I decided to try WB06 on a hefe and it was the game changer for me.  The key is to review the results of posters and see if the flavor profile matches what you are after.  IE WB06 is NOT a banana clove hefe yeast.  It is the apricot/vanilla bright type.  I did a NGP with 3470 at low 60s and it was fab as well.  (I am BJCP btw)

Abbaye all the way on that!  I suspect it is Rochefort.  I really wish someone would get a dry yeast origin chart going.  IE belle saison is 3711, SO4 is Whitbread, WB06 is 3638, etc. 

Note to self: start a US dry yeast company.  ;D

"I say it's just a matter of time before we get more dry strains"....I think it's more a matter of biology.  There are a lot of strains that just don't dry well I'm told.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: dmtaylor on May 08, 2017, 06:58:24 PM
Same here.  I am like 95% dry.  Now that most all of us would agree the dry is considered as good as liquid, I say it's just a matter of time before we get more dry strains.  Due to life and schedule I was "forced" to dry, boy what surprise!  Sure 05 worked fine but I tried with SO4 and had good results so on a whim I decided to try WB06 on a hefe and it was the game changer for me.  The key is to review the results of posters and see if the flavor profile matches what you are after.  IE WB06 is NOT a banana clove hefe yeast.  It is the apricot/vanilla bright type.  I did a NGP with 3470 at low 60s and it was fab as well.  (I am BJCP btw)

Abbaye all the way on that!  I suspect it is Rochefort.  I really wish someone would get a dry yeast origin chart going.  IE belle saison is 3711, SO4 is Whitbread, WB06 is 3638, etc. 

I'm working on a couple of equivalency experiments myself this year, but I'm also very busy at the moment and haven't brewed in months so it's going to take way longer than I'd like.  FWIW, for several years already, I've been collecting notes from all over the interwebs about dry yeasts trying to figure out what's what.  If anyone ever wants to ask for my notes for their own experiments, let me know and I might be able to give you a couple ideas of what *might* be equivalent but that I probably haven't tested myself yet.  If we all work together I think this would go much quicker than if I just try to do it myself -- that would probably take 10 or 15 years!  I'm always either so busy and/or so lazy, it ain't funny.  But I do have tasting notes collected from all over the place, many of which are tallied with the most common comments rising to a top summary kind of thing.  Sources, not recorded, there would be way too many.  Just summarized notes.  I'm somewhat of an absent minded professor, not the greatest at keeping organized, but hey, it's a starting point if nothing else.  I also might have notes to the effect of such and such yeast is "definitely NOT equivalent" or some such thing.  Sometimes half the battle is knowing what NOT to try!  But yes..... I fully intend that eventually I shall become a >95% dry yeast brewer.

Also, very funny you should mention Abbaye, WB-06, and 3638..... those are precisely 3 of the yeasts that I have selected to play with and have in my fridge right now!  I intend to underpitch the living heck out of all of these to stress them out big time.  No mrmalty.com size pitches, or if I do then it would be as a "control" batch only, not expecting big flavors from a normal size pitch.  Trying to confirm whether an underpitch is effective at improving flavors in hefes and Belgians, while also toying with different strains to see what does what.  The trouble with all my experiments is that I always seem to want to test 3 or 4 variables at the same time.  I can only split a small 2-gallon batch so many different ways before it becomes a few ounces of this batch or the other, and it makes little sense for me to brew bigger batches because I don't drink much either.  I'm truly messed up I guess!  ;D
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Phil_M on May 08, 2017, 09:08:41 PM
Am I the only one who has had better luck with liquid yeast as opposed to dry yeast?

I've tried rehydrating, pitching straight, pitching two packs straight as opposed to one, two hydrated packs, etc...but the beers are never as if they were pitched with liquid yeast.

And I'm talking about US-05 and S-04. I agree, it makes no sense, but I haven't had much luck with dry yeast.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: HoosierBrew on May 08, 2017, 09:57:00 PM
Am I the only one who has had better luck with liquid yeast as opposed to dry yeast?


Nope. Not exactly better luck for the most part, but I just plain like liquid cultures better. I find S05 consistently more powdery and slower to clear as compared to 1056. I know many others do just fine with it. I don't brew British styles any more, so I'll skip the yeast debate there. But as for Belgians, just zero comparison with the liquid Belgian strains IMO. I do keep Belle around to finish up a 3724 fermentation, though, and like it fairly well but not necessarily solo. As for lagers, I just prefer 2206 for every non-Pils lager. Just my preference, I don't expect everybody to agree. 
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 08, 2017, 09:57:51 PM
Am I the only one who has had better luck with liquid yeast as opposed to dry yeast?

I've tried rehydrating, pitching straight, pitching two packs straight as opposed to one, two hydrated packs, etc...but the beers are never as if they were pitched with liquid yeast.

And I'm talking about US-05 and S-04. I agree, it makes no sense, but I haven't had much luck with dry yeast.

Are you just experiencing the differences between strains?  I mean, 05 is NEVER gonna be like 001 and 001 is NEVER going to be like 1056.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: yso191 on May 09, 2017, 01:25:12 AM
 I decided to go with mangrove Jack's M31. We'll see how it works.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: coolman26 on May 09, 2017, 03:24:48 AM
I've only had one issue with liquid. I'm not a fan of dry, but sometimes it makes sense. I keep several packs just in case. I've read good things about M31.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: zwiller on May 09, 2017, 04:47:35 AM
Didn't know the Mangrove stuff was dry...  For some reason I was turned off with the name and dismissed it/never looked it up until now. 
Title: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: BrewBama on May 09, 2017, 11:12:02 AM
I've only used the MJ Cali Common. I had a great experience. I hope yours turns out as well. Let us know how it goes

I like the descriptions and chart they provide for suggested styles for their yeast: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0195/8620/files/72539_V3_MJ_CS_Yeast_Bk_WEB.pdf?5432139801183846214

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: HoosierBrew on May 09, 2017, 11:42:17 AM
Didn't know the Mangrove stuff was dry...  For some reason I was turned off with the name and dismissed it/never looked it up until now. 


I haven't used any of the Mangrove stuff. I've heard and read several accounts here and from brewer friends of subpar attenuation on some of their strains. High FGs aren't a good selling point for me. I'm sure it's probably not across the board.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: jrdatta on May 09, 2017, 12:28:50 PM
Am I the only one who has had better luck with liquid yeast as opposed to dry yeast?

I've tried rehydrating, pitching straight, pitching two packs straight as opposed to one, two hydrated packs, etc...but the beers are never as if they were pitched with liquid yeast.

And I'm talking about US-05 and S-04. I agree, it makes no sense, but I haven't had much luck with dry yeast.

If you are pitching two packs of dry for a 5 gallon batch you are pitching big lager size cell counts so that could be effecting it some. But I also agree with Denny that with US-05 it is probably due to the difference in strains between different labs' chico. US-05 seems to break phenolic and spicy compared to wlp001/1056 at least in my experience.

Also S-04 being a British strain you need to pitch a lot less of it than the chico strain to get the right profile for it. For a standard gravity batch of 5 gallons you are looking at like half a pack (there are some real maths on it that Kris England goes into in a chop and brew episode (the RSE one)).
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: old.va.brewer on May 09, 2017, 01:38:13 PM
Am I the only one who has had better luck with liquid yeast as opposed to dry yeast?

I've tried rehydrating, pitching straight, pitching two packs straight as opposed to one, two hydrated packs, etc...but the beers are never as if they were pitched with liquid yeast.

And I'm talking about US-05 and S-04. I agree, it makes no sense, but I haven't had much luck with dry yeast.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: old.va.brewer on May 09, 2017, 01:55:28 PM
I have been using dry yeast for years, but you have to be careful. First the amount of fermentable medium you use and temperature is critical.   I alway take my yeast out of the frig. to warm to room temp. Only 4 oz. of water at 90 degrees. ONLY sprinkle on top do not stir in. Let it rehydrate for a least 15-20 minutes. Add the rehydrated yeast to 16 oz. starter @ a 1.040 gravity. I used dry DME.
I always make 24 hr. starters. But in a pinch, when things just happens, 2  dry yeast packs, but after you aerate only sprinkle the yeast on top and let it slowly rehydrate on it's own. (Don't drown them, its all about hydraulics).
Hope this helps
Good Brewing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 09, 2017, 02:23:12 PM
Didn't know the Mangrove stuff was dry...  For some reason I was turned off with the name and dismissed it/never looked it up until now. 


I haven't used any of the Mangrove stuff. I've heard and read several accounts here and from brewer friends of subpar attenuation on some of their strains. High FGs aren't a good selling point for me. I'm sure it's probably not across the board.

Yeah, I've heard the same.  There's a thread on another forum right now about poor attenuation and flocculation.  http://www.brews-bros.com/topic/121637-m31-tripel-just-wont-drop-out/
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Visor on May 09, 2017, 02:56:10 PM
   I split a batch of Cali Common a couple months ago, did half with M-54 and half with 2112, O.G. was 1.054, the M-54 finished at 1.009 while the 2112 finished at 1.013. Take it for whatever it's worth.
   I'm in the mostly dry camp, probably 85% of my brews I use dry, and thus far I've only had success with liquid a little over half the time. We are about as far from everywhere here as you can get and still be on planet Earth, so ordering liquid this time of year is a high risk crap shoot. Surprisingly I did receive a couple quite warm packs of WLP007 last week, one of which is happily chugging along right now in the other room, so getting warm isn't always a death sentence for liquid.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: zwiller on May 09, 2017, 03:03:56 PM
Can we expound on the "not having luck with dry yeast" comments for a moment?  Let's rule out the biggest one:  Failure to ferment.  Never read of one of these but maybe it has happened.  I have read more than a few guys getting the shaft with liquid...  I have also read that a few guys have had higher FG, then I read the recipe and it's 20% crystal mashed at 155F...  I suspect that the majority of the issues with "dry yeast" stem from a brewer that used chico or other yeast extensively and then switches without further adaptation.  It's not always that easy.  Yeast changes the whole program: IME chico (and Whitbread) can rip right through dextrins like recipe above, while others cannot. 

I am a firm believer that the less you mess around with dry yeast (hydrate/starter/etc) the better off you are.  Only time I rehydrate is on slightly bigger beers (1.060-1.075) that do not justify a 2nd pack and I do so with distilled.  While I am at it, dry yeast do not require O2.  It's already taken care of. 

This is gonna sound weird, but one of the main reasons I am put off with liquid is that it costs more than dry.  Why?  They don't have to dry it and some say cell count is half of dry. 
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 09, 2017, 03:34:08 PM
This is gonna sound weird, but one of the main reasons I am put off with liquid is that it costs more than dry.  Why?  They don't have to dry it and some say cell count is half of dry.

Because of the cost of maintaining and packaging the liquid yeast.  Dry yeast is much cheaper to manufacture and store.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Philbrew on May 09, 2017, 03:53:32 PM
I decided to go with mangrove Jack's M31. We'll see how it works.
I'm currently drinking* a Belgian dubbel made with M31 and it's delicious.  Lots of plum and some pear with a crisp finish.  1.065 --> 1.006  One pack (rehydrated) in a 6 gal. batch.

*not literally currently, it's 9;00 AM!
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Philbrew on May 09, 2017, 07:46:19 PM
Didn't know the Mangrove stuff was dry...  For some reason I was turned off with the name and dismissed it/never looked it up until now. 


I haven't used any of the Mangrove stuff. I've heard and read several accounts here and from brewer friends of subpar attenuation on some of their strains. High FGs aren't a good selling point for me. I'm sure it's probably not across the board.

Yeah, I've heard the same.  There's a thread on another forum right now about poor attenuation and flocculation.  http://www.brews-bros.com/topic/121637-m31-tripel-just-wont-drop-out/ (http://www.brews-bros.com/topic/121637-m31-tripel-just-wont-drop-out/)
I've only used Mangrove Jack's M79 Burton Union (several batches) and M31 Belgian Tripel.  But those have always attenuated very well and dropped clear for me.  I really like those two.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: brewsumore on May 09, 2017, 08:52:56 PM
Didn't know the Mangrove stuff was dry...  For some reason I was turned off with the name and dismissed it/never looked it up until now. 


I haven't used any of the Mangrove stuff. I've heard and read several accounts here and from brewer friends of subpar attenuation on some of their strains. High FGs aren't a good selling point for me. I'm sure it's probably not across the board.

Yeah, I've heard the same.  There's a thread on another forum right now about poor attenuation and flocculation.  http://www.brews-bros.com/topic/121637-m31-tripel-just-wont-drop-out/

I've had poor attenuation with MJ M44 West Coast Ale 2 out of 3 times I used it -- IIRC 2-3 points higher than US-05 on a split batch from 10-gal, but made really good beer both times using their Burton Ale yeast.  I pretty much gave up on the M44, although it flocced better than US-05 for me.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Wilbur on May 09, 2017, 09:28:43 PM
I've almost always used dry yeast and been very happy, the nearest homebrew shop is about 45 minutes away. There are some places in town that sell stuff, one of them still has some White Labs vials sitting in a fridge. I'd love to hear more about some peoples experiences with K97, or the Fermentis/Lallemand Belgian yeasts. I'm in central Illinois, so I don't really have access to Mangrove Jack or some of these other places unless I order online. I'd love to try the Yeast Bay Kveik yeast, or one of the WL Nordic blends, but I haven't heard much about peoples experiences with those either.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Philbrew on May 09, 2017, 09:36:01 PM
I've almost always used dry yeast and been very happy, the nearest homebrew shop is about 45 minutes away. There are some places in town that sell stuff, one of them still has some White Labs vials sitting in a fridge. I'd love to hear more about some peoples experiences with K97, or the Fermentis/Lallemand Belgian yeasts. I'm in central Illinois, so I don't really have access to Mangrove Jack or some of these other places unless I order online. I'd love to try the Yeast Bay Kveik yeast, or one of the WL Nordic blends, but I haven't heard much about peoples experiences with those either.
I've tried to make a kolsch with K-97.  It did not make a kolsch and I didn't like the flavor.  Too tangy and sourish.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: BrewBama on May 09, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
I've almost always used dry yeast and been very happy, the nearest homebrew shop is about 45 minutes away. There are some places in town that sell stuff, one of them still has some White Labs vials sitting in a fridge. I'd love to hear more about some peoples experiences with K97, or the Fermentis/Lallemand Belgian yeasts. I'm in central Illinois, so I don't really have access to Mangrove Jack or some of these other places unless I order online. I'd love to try the Yeast Bay Kveik yeast, or one of the WL Nordic blends, but I haven't heard much about peoples experiences with those either.
I've tried to make a kolsch with K-97.  It did not make a kolsch and I didn't like the flavor.  Too tangy and sourish.
 

Interesting. It's supposed to be a German Ale yeast.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: gman23 on May 09, 2017, 09:40:51 PM
I've almost always used dry yeast and been very happy, the nearest homebrew shop is about 45 minutes away. There are some places in town that sell stuff, one of them still has some White Labs vials sitting in a fridge. I'd love to hear more about some peoples experiences with K97, or the Fermentis/Lallemand Belgian yeasts. I'm in central Illinois, so I don't really have access to Mangrove Jack or some of these other places unless I order online. I'd love to try the Yeast Bay Kveik yeast, or one of the WL Nordic blends, but I haven't heard much about peoples experiences with those either.

I have used K97 five times but still need some further experience. I feel that it is does well in lighter colored beers mainly because it provides a slightly tart character that doesn't work in dark ales. It is slow to clear which is where some of that tart character may come from. I personally, don't think it is well suited for Kolsch or Alt although others will report otherwise. I admittedly have not used it in those styles.

Looking at my notes, it looks like I have done a 'german brown' ale twice, a wheat beer, and some hoppy stuff. The yeast was neatral in the hoppy stuff, undesirable in the brown, and great in the wheat. I could not figure out what was wrong with my brown ale attempts until someone mentioned a tart thing they had notices with K97. Then I connected it. Just my experience up to this point. 

I will be using K97 again this weekend in summer/wheat ale. In my opinion it is not a 'German Ale yeast' that can be used as a sub for WY1007 or WLP036 which was my original assumption.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Philbrew on May 09, 2017, 10:43:31 PM
I dried out about a year and a half ago (yeast, not booze  ;D ).  I'm happily 100% dry yeast.  It's a 220 mile round trip to the LHBS that I'd trust for liquid yeast and waiting for online delivery squashes my brewing spontaneity.  And dry yeast saves a few bucks.

Here's the dry yeasts that I've tried and my thoughts on each:

Frementis W-34/70.   :) My ancient taste buds can't tell the difference from WY2124

Safale US-05.   ??? Meh in a rye ale, OK in an APA.

Mangrove Jack's M79 Burton Union.   :) Love it.  But its been replaced by M36 Liberty Bell Ale.  We'll see.

Lallemand Belle Saison.   :) Love it.

Fermentis K97.   :( Tried it in a kolsch.  No likee.

Danstar London ESB.   :) Good flavor and fast worker but didn't attenuate great.  Like the MJ M79 better.

Fermentis S-04.   :) OK but I liked the MJ M79 and Danstar Notty better.

Fermentis S-189.   :) Liked it in a Maibok.

Danstar Nottingham.   :) Super in an Irish Red Ale.

Mangrove Jack's M31 Belgian Tripel.   :) Made a delicious Belgian Dubbel.

I agree with others that the big hole in dry yeast choice is no kolsch yeast.  But there's lots of other styles to brew.

I'm thinking of trying some American styles this summer with Lallemand BRY-97.  Anyone have thoughts on that?
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: dmtaylor on May 09, 2017, 11:01:15 PM
I dried out about a year and a half ago (yeast, not booze  ;D ).  I'm happily 100% dry yeast.  It's a 220 mile round trip to the LHBS that I'd trust for liquid yeast and waiting for online delivery squashes my brewing spontaneity.  And dry yeast saves a few bucks.

Here's the dry yeasts that I've tried and my thoughts on each:

Frementis W-34/70.   :) My ancient taste buds can't tell the difference from WY2124

Safale US-05.   ??? Meh in a rye ale, OK in an APA.

Mangrove Jack's M79 Burton Union.   :) Love it.  But its been replaced by M36 Liberty Bell Ale.  We'll see.

...

I'm thinking of trying some American styles this summer with Lallemand BRY-97.  Anyone have thoughts on that?

(http://i1022.photobucket.com/albums/af341/dmtaylo1/LikesThis.jpg)

I like BRY-97 a lot.  It's like a little fruitier US-05, with more moderate attenuation in the low to mid 70s instead of close to 80%.  I'll use it for any American ale where I'm afraid of over-attenuation.  It does lag a long while, but don't worry, it's alive and will eventually take off on about day 2 after pitching.  No worries.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Stevie on May 10, 2017, 12:06:01 AM
So four packets... into a 1.038 starter wort.  Nothing.  Zip. Zero. Nada.

Did you check the gravity?  I've had starters ferment out overnight and look totally dead.
Been there before. I tend to give it a swirl to see if there is any dissolved co2, if that doesn't work a quick sniff will tell me where I'm at.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: SWSommer on May 10, 2017, 01:57:19 AM


I primarily use 34/70, US-05 and Belle Saison, plus 71B for mead and D47 for cider. I'll occasionally use S-04 and BRY-97. I also need to do more experimenting with Danstar's London ESB,

If I want to brew with a liquid yeast, I need to plan it out in advance and order onine.
[/quote]

Danstar London ESB is a very reliable yeast.  I use it for most of my stouts and porters. 
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: erockrph on May 10, 2017, 02:41:25 AM


I primarily use 34/70, US-05 and Belle Saison, plus 71B for mead and D47 for cider. I'll occasionally use S-04 and BRY-97. I also need to do more experimenting with Danstar's London ESB,

If I want to brew with a liquid yeast, I need to plan it out in advance and order onine.

Danstar London ESB is a very reliable yeast.  I use it for most of my stouts and porters.
[/quote]
My real question is whether the London ESB is a suitable replacement for liquid yeast in bitters. S04 doesn't quite cut it for me in those styles as it has a bready/yeast character that is a bit off-putting to me. If there was a dry equivalent of 1469, 1968, or WLP013, then that would cover my English brews for me.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: mabrungard on May 10, 2017, 12:29:46 PM
London ESB and Windsor yeasts are low attenuators that are intended for use in worts with simple sugars added. Even with their underattenuation in all-malt worts, I like their flavor. I agree with erockrph that S-04 tends to have a bready flavor. 

If Liberty Bell is the replacement for Burton Union, have many brewers tried it?  I'm also curious about the Empire yeast...another low attenuator.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: jrdatta on May 10, 2017, 12:37:06 PM


I primarily use 34/70, US-05 and Belle Saison, plus 71B for mead and D47 for cider. I'll occasionally use S-04 and BRY-97. I also need to do more experimenting with Danstar's London ESB,

If I want to brew with a liquid yeast, I need to plan it out in advance and order onine.

Danstar London ESB is a very reliable yeast.  I use it for most of my stouts and porters.
My real question is whether the London ESB is a suitable replacement for liquid yeast in bitters. S04 doesn't quite cut it for me in those styles as it has a bready/yeast character that is a bit off-putting to me. If there was a dry equivalent of 1469, 1968, or WLP013, then that would cover my English brews for me.
[/quote]

London ESB is apparently one of the Fullers strains (WLP002/1968).  It does not ferment maltriose leaving an all malt beer above like 1.045 OG cloyingly sweet.  So adding sugar (even to lower gravity worts) is a pretty good idea, but that should be your closest dry equivalent.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: erockrph on May 10, 2017, 02:37:17 PM
Danstar London ESB is a very reliable yeast.  I use it for most of my stouts and porters.
My real question is whether the London ESB is a suitable replacement for liquid yeast in bitters. S04 doesn't quite cut it for me in those styles as it has a bready/yeast character that is a bit off-putting to me. If there was a dry equivalent of 1469, 1968, or WLP013, then that would cover my English brews for me.
London ESB is apparently one of the Fullers strains (WLP002/1968).  It does not ferment maltriose leaving an all malt beer above like 1.045 OG cloyingly sweet.  So adding sugar (even to lower gravity worts) is a pretty good idea, but that should be your closest dry equivalent.
One thing I've never been happy with using English dry yeast is getting the ester profile I'm looking for. I wonder if that is because the pitching rate is a lot higher than an equivalent pack of liquid yeast, or maybe because yeast growth is different for dry yeast vs liquid.

And I have doubts that London ESB is the equivalent of 1968 if it is really that low of an attenuator. With proper handling, I typically see about 75% attenuation from an all-malt recipe with 1968.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: jrdatta on May 10, 2017, 03:30:49 PM
Danstar London ESB is a very reliable yeast.  I use it for most of my stouts and porters.
My real question is whether the London ESB is a suitable replacement for liquid yeast in bitters. S04 doesn't quite cut it for me in those styles as it has a bready/yeast character that is a bit off-putting to me. If there was a dry equivalent of 1469, 1968, or WLP013, then that would cover my English brews for me.
London ESB is apparently one of the Fullers strains (WLP002/1968).  It does not ferment maltriose leaving an all malt beer above like 1.045 OG cloyingly sweet.  So adding sugar (even to lower gravity worts) is a pretty good idea, but that should be your closest dry equivalent.
One thing I've never been happy with using English dry yeast is getting the ester profile I'm looking for. I wonder if that is because the pitching rate is a lot higher than an equivalent pack of liquid yeast, or maybe because yeast growth is different for dry yeast vs liquid.

And I have doubts that London ESB is the equivalent of 1968 if it is really that low of an attenuator. With proper handling, I typically see about 75% attenuation from an all-malt recipe with 1968.

Of course it is not an exact equivalent but that it is as close as you are going to get from a dry strain.  Fullers has even endorsed it.  IIRC Fullers (along with others) uses mixed strain fermentation (take that with a grain of salt) so if it was pulled from one of the lower attenuating strains factored with mutations from different labs create different strains so while all three strains (WLP002, 1968, London ESB) are from the same brewery they all have different profiles and will all make different beer like Denny pointed out earlier in the thread.  IE I hate the profile 1968 gives, it always seems to throw a ton of green apple and tartness but I love WLP002 which seems to restrain itself a bit even though they are the "equivalent".  And again the dry ESB yeast screams for simple sugar additions. 

As to the not liking profiles, that is very likely due to overpitching the British strains, which seem to do a little better at a slight underpitch.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Phil_M on May 11, 2017, 08:35:42 PM
I've been gone for a few days, but I want to touch more on my prior post.

I've seen the best results just pitching dry yeast straight, no rehydration. I suppose the difference in strains could be the case? Though in my experience S-04 isn't really like any of the liquid British yeasts I've used. It's like it's fruity in the wrong ways.

I won't even comment on US-05 from a strain perspective, as I don't like 1056/WLP001, and haven't used either in years. They're so clean as to be boring. Good for a pseudo lager, but that is IMO.
Title: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Ellismr on May 13, 2017, 01:09:27 AM
I agree with earlier comments that there are several strains of dry yeast that make great ales & lagers.  But there are some styles I need liquid yeast for. 

Have you considered washing yeast and keeping a few pints around for brewing those special styles?  It's not too difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Frankenbrew on May 13, 2017, 04:16:15 PM
 Yeah, once I spring for the liquid yeast, I'll try to get 3 or 4 batches out of it.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: JJeffers09 on May 13, 2017, 05:46:41 PM
This is gonna sound weird, but one of the main reasons I am put off with liquid is that it costs more than dry.  Why?  They don't have to dry it and some say cell count is half of dry.

Because of the cost of maintaining and packaging the liquid yeast.  Dry yeast is much cheaper to manufacture and store.
So why isn't the available homebrew strains dry?  It makes sense financially and for us homebrewers why not make dry packs?

Not that anyone has the answer, unless you do I wanna hear it, I'm just thinking online. 😉
Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 13, 2017, 06:49:01 PM

So why isn't the available homebrew strains dry?  It makes sense financially and for us homebrewers why not make dry packs?

Not that anyone has the answer, unless you do I wanna hear it, I'm just thinking online. 😉
Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk

Because not all strains can be successfully dried as I understand it.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: skyler on May 24, 2017, 06:04:51 PM
I've been gone for a few days, but I want to touch more on my prior post.

I've seen the best results just pitching dry yeast straight, no rehydration. I suppose the difference in strains could be the case? Though in my experience S-04 isn't really like any of the liquid British yeasts I've used. It's like it's fruity in the wrong ways.

I won't even comment on US-05 from a strain perspective, as I don't like 1056/WLP001, and haven't used either in years. They're so clean as to be boring. Good for a pseudo lager, but that is IMO.

Have you tried using S-04 REALLY cool? Like, 56F-60F cool? IME, it is the most temperature-sensitive of all the strains of common dry yeast, and standard ale temperatures of 66F-70F make for horrible "homebrewy" beer, but it does a great job fermented at near-lager temperatures. I usually pitch around 52F, set my fermentation freezer to 52F, and let it rise to ~58F. When I get foamy krausen, I raise the freezer temp to 60F and let it free rise up to ~66F to finish (takes about 2 days at that point). I then let it sit at ambient for a day or two and then crash chill to 32F. IME, this will completely ferment a clean ~1.046ish bitter in about a week.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: gman23 on May 26, 2017, 02:57:25 AM
I've been gone for a few days, but I want to touch more on my prior post.

I've seen the best results just pitching dry yeast straight, no rehydration. I suppose the difference in strains could be the case? Though in my experience S-04 isn't really like any of the liquid British yeasts I've used. It's like it's fruity in the wrong ways.

I won't even comment on US-05 from a strain perspective, as I don't like 1056/WLP001, and haven't used either in years. They're so clean as to be boring. Good for a pseudo lager, but that is IMO.

Have you tried using S-04 REALLY cool? Like, 56F-60F cool? IME, it is the most temperature-sensitive of all the strains of common dry yeast, and standard ale temperatures of 66F-70F make for horrible "homebrewy" beer, but it does a great job fermented at near-lager temperatures. I usually pitch around 52F, set my fermentation freezer to 52F, and let it rise to ~58F. When I get foamy krausen, I raise the freezer temp to 60F and let it free rise up to ~66F to finish (takes about 2 days at that point). I then let it sit at ambient for a day or two and then crash chill to 32F. IME, this will completely ferment a clean ~1.046ish bitter in about a week.

Pretty much my experience. I don't think I have gone that cold but my notes specifically say to keep it below 66F
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: BrewBama on May 26, 2017, 11:04:29 AM
Any notes from the gang for Danstar Munich?  I am brewing a watermelon wheat this weekend and would like to hear tribal knowledge on this strain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: dmtaylor on May 26, 2017, 01:04:52 PM
Any notes from the gang for Danstar Munich?  I am brewing a watermelon wheat this weekend and would like to hear tribal knowledge on this strain.

I haven't used it yet but based on TONS of internet searches, it gets extremely mixed reviews, and part of the reason for that is that there is apparently the old regular Munich strain and a newer "Classic" one or some such thing.  In any case, I'd purposely underpitch and hope for the best.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: yso191 on May 26, 2017, 02:36:33 PM
So after making the statement that started this thread prepping for my last brew, I am prepping for my next brew and, yes I'm using liquid yeast.  Some people never learn.

But I couldn't find a good dry yeast for a Czech Premium Lager.  That's what I'm going with.  Yeah.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: gman23 on May 26, 2017, 02:52:24 PM
So after making the statement that started this thread prepping for my last brew, I am prepping for my next brew and, yes I'm using liquid yeast.  Some people never learn.

But I couldn't find a good dry yeast for a Czech Premium Lager.  That's what I'm going with.  Yeah.

I know it doesn't matter at this point but I have heard good things about Mangrove Jack M84 - Bohemian Lager.
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: zwiller on May 26, 2017, 03:08:57 PM
Any notes from the gang for Danstar Munich?  I am brewing a watermelon wheat this weekend and would like to hear tribal knowledge on this strain.

I haven't used it yet but based on TONS of internet searches, it gets extremely mixed reviews, and part of the reason for that is that there is apparently the old regular Munich strain and a newer "Classic" one or some such thing.  In any case, I'd purposely underpitch and hope for the best.

I discount like 90% of online reviews.  Lots of inexperienced amateurs offering their opinion.  This is part of the reason dry yeast gets a bad rap.  This thread itself is probably one of the best dry yeast threads in existence.   
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: Omar on May 26, 2017, 04:44:58 PM
I make mainly American styles and don't care for US-05 so I'm stuck.

Have you considered Nottingham? Fermented on the cooler side it works pretty well in American styles. Beers finish faster and clearer than with US-05
Title: Re: Moving to dry yeast exclusively
Post by: denny on May 26, 2017, 05:21:57 PM
I make mainly American styles and don't care for US-05 so I'm stuck.

Have you considered Nottingham? Fermented on the cooler side it works pretty well in American styles. Beers finish faster and clearer than with US-05

Yep  Used Nottingham a lot in the past.  It has a tartness to it that I don't care for.  Fermented on low 60s.