Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => Yeast and Fermentation => Topic started by: KellerBrauer on March 23, 2020, 01:07:07 pm

Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 23, 2020, 01:07:07 pm
Greetings - I brewed a German Amber Kellerbier yesterday using the SafeLager 34/70 yeast.  I rehydrated and pitched at about 4:00PM into 62°F wort after a typical aeration.  After pitching, I placed my fermenter into my fermentation chamber and set the temperature to 55°.  It’s now about 16 hours later and I see no sign of fermentation.  I raised the temp this morning to 70° to try and get some action.  Any ideas?  I’ve never experienced a lag-time this long.  Is this a slow starting yeast?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: majorvices on March 23, 2020, 01:14:43 pm
First off, 16 hours is not a problem. 70 degrees "might" be. I would have lowered the beer to my pitching temp (you say 55, that works) then aerated and pitched. Second, I would have used 2 packets (or more depending on the gravity). Dry yeast just sometimes has a longer lag. You need not stress over 24-48 hours (though, I do agree that you probably should target a 12-24 hour lag time if at all possible. Other wise you haven't pitched enough yeast.)

The problem with starting a lager off "warm" is that you will be developing unwanted esters - even during the lag. That said, I have heard of award winning brewers who practice this method with success. But I have always found better results with pitching at or near fermentation temp target.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 23, 2020, 01:26:43 pm
First off, 16 hours is not a problem. 70 degrees "might" be. I would have lowered the beer to my pitching temp (you say 55, that works) then aerated and pitched. Second, I would have used 2 packets (or more depending on the gravity). Dry yeast just sometimes has a longer lag. You need not stress over 24-48 hours (though, I do agree that you probably should target a 12-24 hour lag time if at all possible. Other wise you haven't pitched enough yeast.)

The problem with starting a lager off "warm" is that you will be developing unwanted esters - even during the lag. That said, I have heard of award winning brewers who practice this method with success. But I have always found better results with pitching at or near fermentation temp target.

Thanks for this input.
I used two (2) 11.5g packets of yeast.
The batch size is 5 gallons.
SG was 1.057
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Kevin on March 23, 2020, 01:53:19 pm
I regularly use 34/70. I pitch the dry yeast directly into the wort at 60F and hold fermentation at 64 to 66. It does take some time to show signs of fermentation but that doesn't mean  there isn't anything going on. Let the yeast work. btw, I have never had an issue with esters starting fermentation at those temps.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 23, 2020, 02:10:20 pm
Greetings - I brewed a German Amber Kellerbier yesterday using the SafeLager 34/70 yeast.  I rehydrated and pitched at about 4:00PM into 62°F wort after a typical aeration.  After pitching, I placed my fermenter into my fermentation chamber and set the temperature to 55°.  It’s now about 16 hours later and I see no sign of fermentation.  I raised the temp this morning to 70° to try and get some action.  Any ideas?  I’ve never experienced a lag-time this long.  Is this a slow starting yeast?

I have an entire thread on this subject. It takes 34/70 a minimum of 36 to 48 hours to get going. It is very slow starting based on my experience with this.

Yes, this is a slow starting yeast...at least when using the dry version.

https://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=34667.0
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 23, 2020, 03:23:33 pm
Thank you!  I must have missed this thread about this yeast!  Oops!!

Ill relax and have a Home Brew!

Thanks All!!  :)
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 23, 2020, 03:32:09 pm
Thank you!  I must have missed this thread about this yeast!  Oops!!

Ill relax and have a Home Brew!

Thanks All!!  :)

Yes...have a beer and relax! I did a very small (3 gal) batch with excess wort, and pitched one packet of 34/70 just a few days ago. It is just now beginning to show signs of fermentation.

Patience is a virtue.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Village Taphouse on March 23, 2020, 03:52:03 pm
I have some 34/70 in my fridge but I have never used it.  I know many, many brewers who love it but they all mention that on the first run, it can be slow.  In related news, I recently ran about 6 or 7 batches using Lallemand Diamond (it seems to be very 34/70-like... a dry version of 2124) and I used just one packet on the first batch and I did not rehydrate... I just sprinkled it over the top of the wort.  I had active fermentation in about 16 hours which I thought was reasonable.  Really nice yeast and it proves to me that dry yeasts are getting better and better.  If someone were to come out with a dry version of Omega Bayern and WL940 I may never go back to liquid.  :P
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 23, 2020, 04:01:00 pm
FWIW: though it may show characteristics like 2124, 34/70 is pretty far from 2124 genetically. It’s closer to WY2112/WLP810.  Not that it really matters. I just find the genetics interesting.

WLP940 is close genetically to S-23.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200323/96a16f351ae2e23d0d7b56533ee767ee.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Village Taphouse on March 23, 2020, 04:22:52 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 23, 2020, 04:43:10 pm
FWIW: though it may show characteristics like 2124, 34/70 is pretty far from 2124 genetically. It’s closer to WY2112/WLP810.  Not that it really matters. I just find the genetics interesting.

WLP940 is close genetically to S-23.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200323/96a16f351ae2e23d0d7b56533ee767ee.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Fascinating information.  I wanted to use the WY2206, but my LHBS was out, so they recommended the 34/70.  I thought i would give it a go.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 23, 2020, 04:52:32 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 23, 2020, 04:54:18 pm
FWIW: though it may show characteristics like 2124, 34/70 is pretty far from 2124 genetically. It’s closer to WY2112/WLP810.  Not that it really matters. I just find the genetics interesting.

WLP940 is close genetically to S-23.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200323/96a16f351ae2e23d0d7b56533ee767ee.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Fascinating information.  I wanted to use the WY2206, but my LHBS was out, so they recommended the 34/70.  I thought i would give it a go.

They won't make the same kind of beer.  34/70 will give you a light crisp mouthfeel and 2206 will be fuller and malted.  Notb an game changerk but a difference
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Steve Ruch on March 23, 2020, 05:48:44 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
I like 34/70, never had a long lag time: pitch mid afternoon and always fermenting when I check the next morning. I used diamond lager yeast in a schwartz bier recently with good results.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 23, 2020, 05:50:58 pm
Regarding flavor, so far we like the 34/70 as it is clean and crisp, in the profile of a good German Pils/Helles.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Village Taphouse on March 23, 2020, 06:47:16 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that. 
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 23, 2020, 06:49:42 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Yep.  I've gotten a bit more than that out of them since then, but I don't think any any of those 3 directly tell you what the origin is.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Village Taphouse on March 23, 2020, 08:42:21 pm
Yep.  I've gotten a bit more than that out of them since then, but I don't think any any of those 3 directly tell you what the origin is.
Agreed.  What I can say is that Lallemand Diamond makes a delicious beer.  Much more character than say, S-189 which is an okay yeast and a clean fermenter but it's on the boring side. 
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 23, 2020, 10:49:10 pm
Yep.  I've gotten a bit more than that out of them since then, but I don't think any any of those 3 directly tell you what the origin is.
Agreed.  What I can say is that Lallemand Diamond makes a delicious beer.  Much more character than say, S-189 which is an okay yeast and a clean fermenter but it's on the boring side.

How does it compare to 34/70, or a typical liquid (Wyeast) lager yeast?

How about lag time? Do you pitch direct, rehydrate, or make a starter?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 23, 2020, 10:57:33 pm
Yep.  I've gotten a bit more than that out of them since then, but I don't think any any of those 3 directly tell you what the origin is.
Agreed.  What I can say is that Lallemand Diamond makes a delicious beer.  Much more character than say, S-189 which is an okay yeast and a clean fermenter but it's on the boring side.

How does it compare to 34/70, or a typical liquid (Wyeast) lager yeast?

How about lag time? Do you pitch direct, rehydrate, or make a starter?

I pitch both Diamond and 34/70 direct, no rehydration.  I haven't had beers side by side with all 3, so it's hard to compare, but I'd say virtually identical.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Village Taphouse on March 23, 2020, 11:13:37 pm
Yep, 1 pack in 5 gallons and I just sprinkled it over the top of the wort and I had active fermentation in 16 hours.  The flavor profile seems very much like 2124 to me.  I made a wide variety of beers with it... pilsner, helles, a czech-style lager, a dark Mexican lager, a bock, an amber... all very nice. 
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 24, 2020, 01:06:32 am

How about lag time? Do you pitch direct, rehydrate, or make a starter?

This is how I pitch (fill the cone, sprinkle on top, wait a few minutes, complete the fill) and the pitch rate to ensure fast start (I avg the recommendation to 1 g per liter).

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200324/01a4409905e26c8825562c717fad6236.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 24, 2020, 12:35:35 pm
Thank you!  I must have missed this thread about this yeast!  Oops!!

Ill relax and have a Home Brew!

Thanks All!!  :)

Yes...have a beer and relax! I did a very small (3 gal) batch with excess wort, and pitched one packet of 34/70 just a few days ago. It is just now beginning to show signs of fermentation.

Patience is a virtue.

It appeared as if fermentation started late yesterday evening.  Sure enough, it’s in full swing this morning.  I have never experienced a lag time of nearly 30 hours.  Crazy!  But, okay. 

Thanks to everyone for their input! 
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: ynotbrusum on March 24, 2020, 01:09:06 pm
Have to ask - are you simply observing the airlock or were you seeing the krausen forming?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 24, 2020, 01:21:53 pm
Have to ask - are you simply observing the airlock or were you seeing the krausen forming?

Both, actually.  First, the beer was and still is, quite clear.  It still has not gotten cloudy as it usually does.  Also, I’m using a blowoff tube in a flask and the liquid in the blowoff tube was at the exact same level as the liquid in the flask.  So that told me there was no CO2 pressure in the carboy.  Lastly, the foam that gets generated while filling the carboy almost completely diminished until late yesterday when I finally began to see new Krausen starting to form.  This morning I have about 2” of Krausen and a very active blowoff.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 24, 2020, 02:05:59 pm
Thank you!  I must have missed this thread about this yeast!  Oops!!

Ill relax and have a Home Brew!

Thanks All!!  :)

Yes...have a beer and relax! I did a very small (3 gal) batch with excess wort, and pitched one packet of 34/70 just a few days ago. It is just now beginning to show signs of fermentation.

Patience is a virtue.

It appeared as if fermentation started late yesterday evening.  Sure enough, it’s in full swing this morning.  I have never experienced a lag time of nearly 30 hours.  Crazy!  But, okay. 

Thanks to everyone for their input!

30+ hours is quite typical for this yeast. Not crazy, but standard. Search the internet and you will find this is common. What is not common is fast ferment starts. Our last brew with this yeast took 36 hours to show initial signs of activity. And we followed the textbook rules for pitching.

https://fermentis.com/en/tips-n-tricks/for-you-brewers/
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: HopDen on March 24, 2020, 03:00:10 pm
Greetings - I brewed a German Amber Kellerbier yesterday using the SafeLager 34/70 yeast.  I rehydrated and pitched at about 4:00PM into 62°F wort after a typical aeration.  After pitching, I placed my fermenter into my fermentation chamber and set the temperature to 55°.  It’s now about 16 hours later and I see no sign of fermentation.  I raised the temp this morning to 70° to try and get some action.  Any ideas?  I’ve never experienced a lag-time this long.  Is this a slow starting yeast?

34/70 is my go to lager yeast. I have pitched as low as 48* and have seen signs of fermentation in as little as 12 hours. I pitch big, maybe overpitch but I want activity sooner rather than later although 24-36 hours isn't going to hurt anything.

When using fresh, I pitch directly onto the wort, no need to rehydrate. It is a waste of time IMO. I also harvest my yeast and make a starter a few days prior to brew day. Also, pitch the yeast, whether dry or harvested, at fermentation temps. If you pitch higher than fermentation temps or IMO above 60* you run the risk of esters that you don't want in lagers.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 24, 2020, 06:49:31 pm
Thank you!  I must have missed this thread about this yeast!  Oops!!

Ill relax and have a Home Brew!

Thanks All!!  :)

Yes...have a beer and relax! I did a very small (3 gal) batch with excess wort, and pitched one packet of 34/70 just a few days ago. It is just now beginning to show signs of fermentation.

Patience is a virtue.

It appeared as if fermentation started late yesterday evening.  Sure enough, it’s in full swing this morning.  I have never experienced a lag time of nearly 30 hours.  Crazy!  But, okay. 

Thanks to everyone for their input!

30+ hours is quite typical for this yeast. Not crazy, but standard. Search the internet and you will find this is common. What is not common is fast ferment starts. Our last brew with this yeast took 36 hours to show initial signs of activity. And we followed the textbook rules for pitching.

https://fermentis.com/en/tips-n-tricks/for-you-brewers/

That's one of the intricacies of this hobby - we never stop learning.  I'm just fortunate I found the answers I was looking for very quickly.  I have taken great notes on my experience so the next time I use this yeast, I'll know what to expect.  Trust me, I went over my process again and again thinking I missed a step or I did something that killed my yeast!  Thanks for your help!
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 24, 2020, 06:53:33 pm
I wonder why we have such a variety of results.  Some see long lag times, others don't, uwwong the same procedures.  What do you suppose makes the difference?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 24, 2020, 06:55:16 pm
Greetings - I brewed a German Amber Kellerbier yesterday using the SafeLager 34/70 yeast.  I rehydrated and pitched at about 4:00PM into 62°F wort after a typical aeration.  After pitching, I placed my fermenter into my fermentation chamber and set the temperature to 55°.  It’s now about 16 hours later and I see no sign of fermentation.  I raised the temp this morning to 70° to try and get some action.  Any ideas?  I’ve never experienced a lag-time this long.  Is this a slow starting yeast?

34/70 is my go to lager yeast. I have pitched as low as 48* and have seen signs of fermentation in as little as 12 hours. I pitch big, maybe overpitch but I want activity sooner rather than later although 24-36 hours isn't going to hurt anything.

When using fresh, I pitch directly onto the wort, no need to rehydrate. It is a waste of time IMO. I also harvest my yeast and make a starter a few days prior to brew day. Also, pitch the yeast, whether dry or harvested, at fermentation temps. If you pitch higher than fermentation temps or IMO above 60* you run the risk of esters that you don't want in lagers.

I agree with you on the re-hydration aspect.  The reason why I like to re-hydrate my dry yeast is to make it easier to pitch onto my carboy.  Too many times I have pitched dry directly onto the carboy and much of the yeast sticks to the walls of the glass and I end up having to put extra work into getting it off.  I'm sure the little bit stuck on the walls may not make a difference - I think its more of an OC thing.  :-\
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 24, 2020, 06:58:33 pm
I wonder why we have such a variety of results.  Some see long lag times, others don't, uwwong the same procedures.  What do you suppose makes the difference?

That's an excellent question.  I was wondering the same thing.  I attribute the difference to the water perhaps or possibly the wort composition???  Great question.  Ill be watching the responses.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 24, 2020, 07:16:31 pm
Do the ones getting a long lag use yeast nutrient?  If so, what brand, how much, and when is it added?

I used to get long lags but I began pitching more yeast and using yeast nutrient. The OP pitched plenty of yeast...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 24, 2020, 08:12:35 pm
Do the ones getting a long lag use yeast nutrient?  If so, what brand, how much, and when is it added?

I used to get long lags but I began pitching more yeast and using yeast nutrient. The OP pitched plenty of yeast...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I still use 1 pack unrehydrated for 5.5 gal. up to 1.060 OG.  I try to use yeast nutrient, but I occasionally forget and it doesn't really seem to make much difference, at least in lag
 time. 
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: HopDen on March 24, 2020, 08:42:04 pm
Do the ones getting a long lag use yeast nutrient?  If so, what brand, how much, and when is it added?

I used to get long lags but I began pitching more yeast and using yeast nutrient. The OP pitched plenty of yeast...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I never use yeast nutrient. All the nutrients that your yeast need should be in a properly done mash. That is, in mine, RO water that has had all of the required salts and the use of fresh ingredients.
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 24, 2020, 09:21:39 pm
Zinc can be deficient even in all-malt worts, because most of it tends to be lost during lautering. Extra zinc can be added in mineral form (ZnSO4 or ZnCl2), or it can be incorporated in a nutritional product.

To get around the law, German brewers would incorporate zinc plumbing fittings in their breweries, or add zinc chains to the rakes or simply add live yeast to the boil kettle.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 24, 2020, 09:22:21 pm
Do the ones getting a long lag use yeast nutrient?  If so, what brand, how much, and when is it added?

I used to get long lags but I began pitching more yeast and using yeast nutrient. The OP pitched plenty of yeast...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I never use yeast nutrient. All the nutrients that your yeast need should be in a properly done mash. That is, in mine, RO water that has had all of the required salts and the use of fresh ingredients.

Using yeast nutrient can be a help if you reuse your yeast.  But I agree it's not crucial.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 24, 2020, 09:50:37 pm
From the Fermentis website...and they state no nutrients needed:

Fermentation starts immediately, but significant CO2 release and aroma formation will only be perceptible after 12 to 24 hours for ale yeasts and 16 to 32 hours for lager yeasts.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 24, 2020, 10:07:21 pm
Zinc can be deficient even in all-malt worts, because most of it tends to be lost during lautering. Extra zinc can be added in mineral form (ZnSO4 or ZnCl2), or it can be incorporated in a nutritional product.

To get around the law, German brewers would incorporate zinc plumbing fittings in their breweries, or add zinc chains to the rakes or simply add live yeast to the boil kettle.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

At a family brewery in Niederbayern, the brewer had gotten yeast from his buddy a couple of towns over that brews more often. It was a big tub of yeast. Looking at pictures last year, I did a double take, it was galvanized, i.e. zinc coated. There are ways around the BHG.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 24, 2020, 11:22:53 pm



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: narvin on March 24, 2020, 11:33:00 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: mabrungard on March 24, 2020, 11:34:14 pm
I can't envision why yeast nutrient would aid lag time. In that early stage, yeast are just acclimating and not actually reproducing in great number or exhausting their internal nutrient stores.

With regard to zinc, many raw water supplies have zinc in them. But if you're using RO water, any zinc that might have been in the water is gone due to the RO process. Adding zinc is an important necessity when brewing with RO water. Eventually, your yeast will run out of zinc and this ferment or future reuses will suffer.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: ynotbrusum on March 25, 2020, 01:32:12 am
I can't envision why yeast nutrient would aid lag time. In that early stage, yeast are just acclimating and not actually reproducing in great number or exhausting their internal nutrient stores.

With regard to zinc, many raw water supplies have zinc in them. But if you're using RO water, any zinc that might have been in the water is gone due to the RO process. Adding zinc is an important necessity when brewing with RO water. Eventually, your yeast will run out of zinc and this ferment or future reuses will suffer.

+1 Martin.  I use zinc nutrient, because I serially repitch and brew with RO and add back minimal salts in my lagers.  Somewhere (Dr. Bamforth maybe?) I read or heard that zinc was helpful, so I just always add it as my last ingredient in the boil.
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 25, 2020, 01:37:58 am
Well, while I realize it’s anecdotal, all I know is I get faster starts, more vigorous fermentations, and faster complete finishes with nutrient. 

I found it is more advantageous to add it to the FV vs the kettle. I didn’t understand why but I’ve read the nutrients get bound in the trüb and I like to transfer clear wort from kettle to FV.   
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 25, 2020, 12:55:06 pm
I can't envision why yeast nutrient would aid lag time. In that early stage, yeast are just acclimating and not actually reproducing in great number or exhausting their internal nutrient stores.

I agree 100%.

Nutrients are not always necessary according to Chris White in his book about yeast.  However, as I recall, and I’m paraphrasing here, he says using nutrients will not hurt and it’s better to be safe than sorry.  So, I add 1/2 tsp of nutrient in the final 15 minutes of the boil with every batch.  The product I use is made my White Labs.  I figure: why not?  Now, maybe Chris made this statement to sell more nutrient.....maybe???  ::)
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 25, 2020, 12:55:20 pm
.........I like to transfer clear wort from kettle to FV.

Me too. But many here claim it makes no difference, clear or muddy/cloudy.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 25, 2020, 12:58:29 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Silver_Is_Money on March 25, 2020, 12:59:45 pm
Per the Lallemand website, their Fermaid K should be stirred into the Wort just prior to yeast pitching.  I believe that boiling it destroys much if not all of it.

Quote
For normal applications, the recommended addition rate of Fermaid K is 25 grams per 100 liters.
Fermaid K should be dispersed (stirred) into the wort just prior to pitching the yeast.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Silver_Is_Money on March 25, 2020, 01:01:46 pm
I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

Both Lallemand and Fermentis now advise that it is not necessary at all to aerate the Wort prior to pitching their dry yeast products.  That requirement is now the sole domain of liquid yeast.  They are both OK with direct pitching without rehydration now also, after both did studies which concluded that there is little real world benefit gained by rehydration (after decades of saying that rehydration was a critical requirement).
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Kevin on March 25, 2020, 01:12:40 pm
Both Lallemand and Fermentis now advise that it is not necessary at all to aerate the Wort prior to pitching their dry yeast products.  That requirement is now the sole domain of liquid yeast.  They are both OK with direct pitching without rehydration now also, after both did studies which concluded that there is little real world benefit gained by rehydration (after decades of saying that rehydration was a critical requirement).

Old habits die hard and especially in the homebrew community it seems that if you challenge a method that someone has been using for a long time... often a method taught to them by someone they consider "expert", they tend to react defensively.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: narvin on March 25, 2020, 01:16:15 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

It has to do with how the yeast is dried.  From lallemand:

Quote
BRY-97 yeast has been conditioned to survive rehydration. The yeast
contains an adequate reserve of carbohydrates and unsaturated
fatty acids to achieve active growth. It is unnecessary to aerate
wort upon first use.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 25, 2020, 01:17:41 pm
I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

Both Lallemand and Fermentis now advise that it is not necessary at all to aerate the Wort prior to pitching their dry yeast products.  That requirement is now the sole domain of liquid yeast.  They are both OK with direct pitching without rehydration now also, after both did studies which concluded that there is little real world benefit gained by rehydration (after decades of saying that rehydration was a critical requirement).

That’s fascinating information.  Do either of these manufacturers give a logical reason why it’s not necessary?  As I understood, oxygen is required for the yeast cells to multiply.  Now you have me thinking....
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Silver_Is_Money on March 25, 2020, 01:23:26 pm
That’s fascinating information.  Do either of these manufacturers give a logical reason why it’s not necessary?  As I understood, oxygen is required for the yeast cells to multiply.  Now you have me thinking....

Aeration is required such that certain aerobically produced lipids called sterols which are required of the yeast as precursors in order for them to produce alcohol get adequately produced by the yeast.  No sterols, no alcohol production.  Both dry yeast manufacturers state that fully sufficient of these requisit sterols are present within each package of their dry yeast.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 25, 2020, 01:52:51 pm
The info is readily available on their website:

https://fermentis.com/en/tips-n-tricks/for-you-brewers/
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 25, 2020, 02:06:48 pm
...and they state no nutrients needed:


I haven’t seen that no nutrients are needed in their information. Maybe I missed it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 25, 2020, 02:16:05 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

Nope, I don't.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 25, 2020, 02:17:41 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

Because when dry yeast is produced, it's growth is stopped during sterols production, so it's loaded with sterols.  The purpose of aeration is to allow the yeast to produce sterols. If they're already there, there's no need for aeration.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 25, 2020, 02:19:38 pm
Per the Lallemand website, their Fermaid K should be stirred into the Wort just prior to yeast pitching.  I believe that boiling it destroys much if not all of it.

Quote
For normal applications, the recommended addition rate of Fermaid K is 25 grams per 100 liters.
Fermaid K should be dispersed (stirred) into the wort just prior to pitching the yeast.

While the Wyeast nutrient I use is supposed to be boiled.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: KellerBrauer on March 25, 2020, 05:27:28 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

Because when dry yeast is produced, it's growth is stopped during sterols production, so it's loaded with sterols.  The purpose of aeration is to allow the yeast to produce sterols. If they're already there, there's no need for aeration.

That makes sense.  I find it odd, however, that this discovery is recent.  I suppose it’s all part of the “science” aspect of this hobby and science is discovering new things every day.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 25, 2020, 05:43:29 pm
Do people aerate with dry yeast?  In theory you don't need to, but regardless of how the beer turns out it could change the lag time.

I don’t understand - why would aeration NOT be necessary with a dry yeast over a liquid yeast?  I aerate my wort regardless of the type of yeast I use.  Is it not necessary to aerate with dry yeast?

Because when dry yeast is produced, it's growth is stopped during sterols production, so it's loaded with sterols.  The purpose of aeration is to allow the yeast to produce sterols. If they're already there, there's no need for aeration.

That makes sense.  I find it odd, however, that this discovery is recent.  I suppose it’s all part of the “science” aspect of this hobby and science is discovering new things every day.

I think there are 2 things at work here....the method of producing dry yeast has changed over the last 20 years.  And there's a persistence of dogma in the homebrew world that tends to make many homebrewers resistant to New info.  I know I got a lot of pushback after posting info about rehydration and aeration that came directly f4om biologists with the companies. Many homebrew "experts" simply repeat what they've heard without testing or looking into it.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 25, 2020, 06:14:48 pm
...and they state no nutrients needed:


I haven’t seen that no nutrients are needed in their information. Maybe I missed it.

Pg. 13 under tips...Active Dry Yeast is rich enough in lipids and minerals for it's own multiplication process. Also, there is no requirement for adding O2 to the cooled wort.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: ynotbrusum on March 26, 2020, 01:15:31 am
Like Denny I find that dry yeast does not need re-hydration, nor aeration.  Even so, I must admit that in the transfer of wort to the fermenter, there are bubbles that may hold on their surface yeast cells while the bubbles exist, for awhile.  Not sure of the impact of same, but it exists...
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 26, 2020, 04:05:05 pm
Like Denny I find that dry yeast does not need re-hydration, nor aeration.  Even so, I must admit that in the transfer of wort to the fermenter, there are bubbles that may hold on their surface yeast cells while the bubbles exist, for awhile.  Not sure of the impact of same, but it exists...

Agreed.  While I don't do a separate aeration step, I do pump my wort into the fermenter.  I'm certain that gives me at least some aeration.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: dmtaylor on March 27, 2020, 01:16:25 am
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Silver_Is_Money on March 27, 2020, 01:35:23 am
I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

Dat otta give it the boost required to make a legitimate claim about being the worlds most used yeast.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 27, 2020, 01:43:16 am
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

The yeast Charlie P got from a Coors technician is not at all like those 34/70 derivatives. It has an apple ester note to it ( not Acetaldehyde), not as clean as 34/70. I made a beer with it, not what I'm looking for.

He has said he found out it was isolated by Coors from a keg of Budweiser.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 27, 2020, 01:53:07 am
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

The yeast Charlie P got from a Coors technician is not at all like those 34/70 derivatives. It has an apple ester note to it ( not Acetaldehyde), not as clean as 34/70. I made a beer with it, not what I'm looking for.

He has said he found out it was isolated by Coors from a keg of Budweiser.

And there you go! Apple = Budweiser.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: dmtaylor on March 27, 2020, 01:54:51 am
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

The yeast Charlie P got from a Coors technician is not at all like those 34/70 derivatives. It has an apple ester note to it ( not Acetaldehyde), not as clean as 34/70. I made a beer with it, not what I'm looking for.

He has said he found out it was isolated by Coors from a keg of Budweiser.

And there you go! Apple = Budweiser.

Heh... I get banana from Bud.  YMMV
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: ynotbrusum on March 27, 2020, 11:09:10 am
Are you guys referring to Cry Havoc from CP as the Bud yeast?  If so, then we really are coming full circle with fermenting lager yeast at ale temps, eh?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: dmtaylor on March 27, 2020, 12:02:24 pm
Are you guys referring to Cry Havoc from CP as the Bud yeast?  If so, then we really are coming full circle with fermenting lager yeast at ale temps, eh?

I'm not sure, in fact I was wondering the same thing....... Cry Havoc isn't equivalent to Wyeast 2124 or 2035 or 2001, but rather is closest to 2007 Pilsen Lager, genetically.

Of these, I'm truly not certain whether any of these are the true Bud yeast, or which one is actually the closest.  I'm not much of an origins guy, and should probably duck out at this point.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 27, 2020, 02:09:11 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

Not according to either manufacturer.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: dmtaylor on March 27, 2020, 03:17:47 pm
Never saw that before.  I really like the character of 940.  I have used S23 but never considered it close to the character of 940 but I should try it again.  Most 34/70 brewers I know say the flavor characteristics of it are very similar to 2124 and I thought Diamond was too.  2124 has been a favorite lager yeast of mine for a very long time and I love the aroma of a beer made with it.  Then again, I could say that about a number of others too.  Cheers BB.

I have info from the manufacturers that both 34/70 and Diamnond are related to 2124.
Do you remember talking on the Blue Board about how Fermentis and Lallemand did not specifically say it was "dry 2124" but I believe they both said that the yeast was from Weihenstephan and also that it was "the most-used yeast strain in the world" which I think Wyeast claims about 2124 as well.  We concluded that they were dried versions of 2124 but we didn't really have any verification of that.

Thank you for bringing this up.  Based on combination of genetic research and your notes above, I wonder whether the W-34/70 and Diamond are not 2124 Bohemian Lager, but rather 2035 American Lager, which is likely from Anheuser-Busch-Budweiser.  How's abouts dats!

Not according to either manufacturer.

*shrug*

The fact is, manufacturers have so often times provided data NOT consistent with genetics testing, or vice-versa, more often than not.  So, there's no way to know what to believe or whom to trust.  In the end, just like anything else, each of us will believe whatever we want, or provide an appropriate response of "I don't really know, I can't know for sure", and maybe even "...and neither can you".

Fun stuff to think about though anyway.  I don't mean to dismiss your information as false, not for sure.  I just remain skeptical, because genetically, at least according to one (or two?) tests, 2124 is likely not very closely related to those other yeasts.  Either that, or maybe ALL lager yeasts are so very closely related to one another that they're all basically the same... which personally I do NOT "believe" to be true.

 :o  ;D  8)
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: nassimsultan on March 27, 2020, 08:21:22 pm
I use 3470 regularly and I find that I typically see signs of fermentation in less than 24 hours and often within 18 hours (typically I pitch around 48F and set my fermentation temp to 48F). Here are some thoughts (I’m sure someone else has already posted these, but here it goes anyway)...

Inevitably store bought yeast is going to be a little bit old: there’s a decent lag between when the yeast gets packaged, when it gets delivered to a store, when it gets purchased, and when it finally gets pitched. Because of this, it can take some time for the yeast to “wake up” and the start of fermentation can be sluggish. If you aren’t already making a starter, I highly recommend it. Not only will it wake up your yeast it will also help insure your have enough cells (more on that below). Chris White’s yeast book has wonderful and easy to follow info on making starters. On a related note, if the yeast is being pitched out of a packet that was taken straight from the fridge the yeast will be much colder than your wort and so it will take even longer for it to adjust and with that more of a lag.

Second, I know others have commented on whether or not you need to aerate, but I would highly, highly recommend aerating or, if you can, oxygenating. Once again I will point you in the direction of Chris White’s book in that it highlights the importance to having enough oxygen early in fermentation. Of the handful of times I have had slow starts with 3470, a few of them were due to not enough oxygen.

Finally, double check that you have enough cells. The few times I have had lags with 3470 most of the time it was because I didn’t have enough yeast cells. Mr Malty has a great pitching calculator and Chris White’s book has an easy to follow formula. Insuring you have enough cells will help you start fermentation better. It will also help insure you make excellent lagers. 

Good luck!
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 27, 2020, 08:47:55 pm
Concerning 34/70...

We have used it on two brews. Each time it lagged for a full 36+ hours before active fermentation was observed. Each time we followed Fermentis directions with regards to pitching rate, temperature, etc.

The expire date on the package is September 2021.

Once it gets going it is fine. But it does test your patience.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 27, 2020, 08:57:52 pm
I use 3470 regularly and I find that I typically see signs of fermentation in less than 24 hours and often within 18 hours (typically I pitch around 48F and set my fermentation temp to 48F). Here are some thoughts (I’m sure someone else has already posted these, but here it goes anyway)...

Inevitably store bought yeast is going to be a little bit old: there’s a decent lag between when the yeast gets packaged, when it gets delivered to a store, when it gets purchased, and when it finally gets pitched. Because of this, it can take some time for the yeast to “wake up” and the start of fermentation can be sluggish. If you aren’t already making a starter, I highly recommend it. Not only will it wake up your yeast it will also help insure your have enough cells (more on that below). Chris White’s yeast book has wonderful and easy to follow info on making starters. On a related note, if the yeast is being pitched out of a packet that was taken straight from the fridge the yeast will be much colder than your wort and so it will take even longer for it to adjust and with that more of a lag.

Second, I know others have commented on whether or not you need to aerate, but I would highly, highly recommend aerating or, if you can, oxygenating. Once again I will point you in the direction of Chris White’s book in that it highlights the importance to having enough oxygen early in fermentation. Of the handful of times I have had slow starts with 3470, a few of them were due to not enough oxygen.

Finally, double check that you have enough cells. The few times I have had lags with 3470 most of the time it was because I didn’t have enough yeast cells. Mr Malty has a great pitching calculator and Chris White’s book has an easy to follow formula. Insuring you have enough cells will help you start fermentation better. It will also help insure you make excellent lagers. 

Good luck!

Sorry, but you and Chris are both at odds with the people who make the yeast.  Was he talking about dry yeast or liquid yeast?  Also, using vitality starters, I find cell count is a very minor thing.  Chris even confirmed that to me when he said "homebrewers are too hung up on numbers".  I have been pitching cold yeast straight of the fridge for nearly 20 years and I get great performance that way.

Bottom line...do what works for you.

And why the heck is everybody so hung up on a short lag time?
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Silver_Is_Money on March 27, 2020, 09:15:20 pm
I like 34/70, never had a long lag time: pitch mid afternoon and always fermenting when I check the next morning. I used diamond lager yeast in a schwartz bier recently with good results.

This mirrors my experience.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 27, 2020, 09:18:07 pm


Short lag time aids in prevention of an off infection getting established.

My experience to date with 34/70 is with dry. But we will harvest some fresh yeast (34/70) from a recent brew next week. So that should behave more like what we have experienced in the past.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 27, 2020, 09:57:07 pm


Short lag time aids in prevention of an off infection getting established.

My experience to date with 34/70 is with dry. But we will harvest some fresh yeast (34/70) from a recent brew next week. So that should behave more like what we have experienced in the past.

If your sanitation is good, that's really not an issue. I mean, you wouldn't want to wait a week for it to start fermenting, but in practical terms 72 hours isn't really different from 2 hours.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 27, 2020, 10:08:25 pm


Short lag time aids in prevention of an off infection getting established.

My experience to date with 34/70 is with dry. But we will harvest some fresh yeast (34/70) from a recent brew next week. So that should behave more like what we have experienced in the past.

If your sanitation is good, that's really not an issue. I mean, you wouldn't want to wait a week for it to start fermenting, but in practical terms 72 hours isn't really different from 2 hours.

Yes, I agree. Our sanitation is like a hospital operating room, hyper-clean.
And our recent brew (36 hour lag) is just fine. In fact, it is very good, a Munich Helles.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 28, 2020, 03:11:06 pm
Well, while I realize it’s anecdotal, all I know is I get faster starts, more vigorous fermentations, and faster complete finishes with nutrient. 

I found it is more advantageous to add it to the FV vs the kettle. I didn’t understand why but I’ve read the nutrients get bound in the trüb and I like to transfer clear wort from kettle to FV.
I just listened to a 15 Oct 19 Brew Strong episode on off flavors where they recommended adding Zinc. Something like, yeast need Zinc for a healthy fermentation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: hopfenundmalz on March 28, 2020, 04:23:49 pm
Well, while I realize it’s anecdotal, all I know is I get faster starts, more vigorous fermentations, and faster complete finishes with nutrient. 

I found it is more advantageous to add it to the FV vs the kettle. I didn’t understand why but I’ve read the nutrients get bound in the trüb and I like to transfer clear wort from kettle to FV.
I just listened to a 15 Oct 19 Brew Strong episode on off flavors where they recommended adding Zinc. Something like, yeast need Zinc for a healthy fermentation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When I looked the ingredients used in Wyeast's nutrient, zinc was #3 on the list.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 28, 2020, 04:26:47 pm
Well, while I realize it’s anecdotal, all I know is I get faster starts, more vigorous fermentations, and faster complete finishes with nutrient. 

I found it is more advantageous to add it to the FV vs the kettle. I didn’t understand why but I’ve read the nutrients get bound in the trüb and I like to transfer clear wort from kettle to FV.
I just listened to a 15 Oct 19 Brew Strong episode on off flavors where they recommended adding Zinc. Something like, yeast need Zinc for a healthy fermentation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When I looked the ingredients used in Wyeast's nutrient, zinc was #3 on the list.

Yep.  And over 20 years ago, when zinc in brewing was the rage, I spent 6 months or so experimenting with adding zinc.  I noticed no difference,  so I stopped doing it.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 28, 2020, 04:31:02 pm
That’s interesting because I can definitely tell a difference between when I do and don’t use nutrient. It’s night and day.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 28, 2020, 05:29:38 pm
That’s interesting because I can definitely tell a difference between when I do and don’t use nutrient. It’s night and day.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I use nutrient in starters and in the kettle (when I remember).  Can't say that I can tell a difference but it doesn't hurt
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: mabrungard on March 28, 2020, 09:11:43 pm
For RO brewers, yeast nutrient or zinc is an important addition since zinc is stripped out of RO water. If you're using a regular tap water, it may not have a zinc deficiency.

For those of you using a yeast nutrient or zinc supplement, use only the recommended amount since zinc has a very metallic taste. This is a case more "more is less".
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 28, 2020, 09:28:29 pm
For RO brewers, yeast nutrient or zinc is an important addition since zinc is stripped out of RO water. If you're using a regular tap water, it may not have a zinc deficiency.

For those of you using a yeast nutrient or zinc supplement, use only the recommended amount since zinc has a very metallic taste. This is a case more "more is less".
Rgr that. I should have prefaced my comments with “I used Distilled water” (when the store has it). Maybe Denny’s well water is the variable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 29, 2020, 02:41:01 pm
For RO brewers, yeast nutrient or zinc is an important addition since zinc is stripped out of RO water. If you're using a regular tap water, it may not have a zinc deficiency.

For those of you using a yeast nutrient or zinc supplement, use only the recommended amount since zinc has a very metallic taste. This is a case more "more is less".
Rgr that. I should have prefaced my comments with “I used Distilled water” (when the store has it). Maybe Denny’s well water is the variable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good be.  I'm lucky to have very consistent, good quality water.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 30, 2020, 02:51:27 pm
Pitched W34/70 into 57*F, 1.057 Amber lager last night at 1730. This AM at 0730 I have a “blip” on the Tilt.  I just went down to look (~0930) and I have airlock activity.

This is routine around here. Long lags are a thing of the past.

Speaking of the past... If the past is any indication, it will be fully attenuated in 5-6 days. We’ll see.

As has been said before: I doubt there’s much difference in a beer that experienced a long lag and one that didn’t. I doubt anyone will ever receive a comment on a score sheet pointing out lag time. ....but if I can be drinking a nice lager two/three/four days sooner, I’m in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 30, 2020, 03:04:41 pm
Pitched W34/70 into 57*F, 1.057 Amber lager last night at 1730. This AM at 0730 I have a “blip” on the Tilt.  I just went down to look (~0930) and I have airlock activity.


Was this a package of dry yeast? One package or two?

We have pitched this yeast with 3 different brews, always followed the procedure published by Fermentis, and always experienced a minimum lag time of 36+ hours.

And we double pitch in quantity.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 30, 2020, 03:08:18 pm
Pitched W34/70 into 57*F, 1.057 Amber lager last night at 1730. This AM at 0730 I have a “blip” on the Tilt.  I just went down to look (~0930) and I have airlock activity.


Was this a package of dry yeast? One package or two?

We have pitched this yeast with 3 different brews, always followed the procedure published by Fermentis, and always experienced a minimum lag time of 36+ hours.

And we double pitch in quantity.

Are you following current or past Fermentis guidelines?  AFAIK, what they have on their website is no longer what they recommend in person.  I also don't know now much difference it makes either way.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: Northern_Brewer on March 30, 2020, 03:37:03 pm
For those of you using a yeast nutrient or zinc supplement, use only the recommended amount since zinc has a very metallic taste. This is a case more "more is less".

More importantly, yeast (ale more than lager) can be quite sensitive to "high" zinc levels, particularly in the absence of manganese. See eg this work at Heriot-Watt funded by Suntory : https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1998.tb00996.x

Murphys (https://murphyandson.co.uk/store/yeast-maintenance/81-zinc-sulphate-5-kghz.html)  suggest :
"Densky et al. (1966) showed that worts contain from 0.05 - 0.10 ppm (mg/litre) Zn and noted growth stimulation if these worts were supplemented with Zn to a level of 0.5 ppm.

Frey et al (1967) found from 0.04 to 0.07 ppm of Zinc in worts and obtained stimulation of both fermentation and growth at 0.5 ppm. The study also showed that Zinc is not toxic to yeast at the 5 ppm level. (Yeast Technology, Reed & Peppler)

It can help reduce sulphury characteristics of beers by reacting with Hydrogen sulphide produced during the fermentation to precipi-tate insoluble Zinc sulphide....Rates can vary depending on the specific yeast strain used and the composition in the grist. Zinc will typically be added within a range of 0.045 to 0.11 grams per hectolitre of Zinc sulphate heptahydrate. (Equivalent to 0.1 to 0.25 mg/litre as Zn 2+)"
Title: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: BrewBama on March 30, 2020, 03:52:17 pm
I direct pitch by filling the cone of the FV, add nutrient in the fermenter, pitch 1 gram per liter wort, wait a few minutes (clean something), then finish filling the FV.   (It’s illustrated in a screenshot from the Fermentis Tips and Tricks app in post #22 above)

This may indeed all be old info but I like the results I get using this method.

I did notice on the Lallemand site, they have a pitch rate calculator that recommends 29.67 grams (~ three packs) of Diamond in the same 5.5 gal (~21 liters) 1.057 wort.  That calculates to ~1.4 grams per liter.

I’ve not used Diamond but plan to soon.  ...but I’ll probably use my same 1 gram per liter (two packs).

Also, Label Peelers has really good prices on dry yeast and they ship it free (and fast).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: TXFlyGuy on March 30, 2020, 03:55:12 pm


Are you following current or past Fermentis guidelines?  AFAIK, what they have on their website is no longer what they recommend in person.  I also don't know now much difference it makes either way.


Following their current website info...

① Direct pitching:

easy to use

Pitch the yeast directly in the fermentation vessel on the surface of the wort at or above the fermentation temperature. Progressively sprinkle the dry yeast into the wort ensuring the yeast covers all the surface of wort available to avoid clumps. Ideally, the yeast will be added during the first part of the filling of the vessel; in which case hydration can be done at wort temperature higher than fermentation temperature, the fermenter being then filled with wort at lower temperature to bring the entire wort temperature at fermentation temperature.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: ynotbrusum on March 30, 2020, 03:55:49 pm
I brewed a Zum Uerige homage beer (1.048 OG) on Saturday (5.5 gallons); pitched two packets of 34/70 by sprinkling on top of the wort (at around 2 pm @ 54F) and it was showing no gravity change after 18 hours, but sometime thereafter, it started rocking.  That is, I didn't worry about it and this morning (Monday) the gravity reading was 1.034.  I suspect it will be done in about 6 days total, as usual.  Fast start, fast fart....YMMV and it probably won't be much of a final difference.  I know that when I re-pitch, I get a very quick start with just about any yeast, but that is probably the nuclear weapon analogy that S. Cerevisiae always talked about.
Title: Re: SafeLager W-34/70 Question
Post by: denny on March 30, 2020, 03:58:11 pm


Are you following current or past Fermentis guidelines?  AFAIK, what they have on their website is no longer what they recommend in person.  I also don't know now much difference it makes either way.


Following their current website info...

① Direct pitching:

easy to use

Pitch the yeast directly in the fermentation vessel on the surface of the wort at or above the fermentation temperature. Progressively sprinkle the dry yeast into the wort ensuring the yeast covers all the surface of wort available to avoid clumps. Ideally, the yeast will be added during the first part of the filling of the vessel; in which case hydration can be done at wort temperature higher than fermentation temperature, the fermenter being then filled with wort at lower temperature to bring the entire wort temperature at fermentation temperature.

Good on ya!