Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - hopfenundmalz

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 587
31
The study had commercial yeasts, but those were coded. There are people who say they have cracked the codes. After looking this over, I wonder how accurate the code cracking was.

The White Labs .pdf is here.
https://www.whitelabs.com/sites/default/files/White%20Labs%202018%20Web%20Catalog.pdf

32
The Pub / Re: Look who I found at my Brewery!
« on: May 05, 2018, 11:35:26 PM »
awesome!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I miss that big guy.  Maybe he’ll be in Portland next month.
Same here.

33
Correct me if I'm wrong but the working hypothesis is now that -

Ballantine Ale became BRY 97 and was sold to Anchor. This is sold to us as Wyeast 1056, WLP051, or S-05. White Labs confirmed this is indeed technically a lager strain.

Ballantine Beer became BRY96 and was sold to Sierra Nevada. This is sold to us as WLP001.

A few questions:
1) Would this imply that Ballantine was using an ale strain for lager and a lager strain for ale?
2) Is this is the reverse of Mark's theory (which made sense) that Sierra was using a lager strain?
3) Is their a Wyeast or dry equivalent for Sierra Nevada?

I would assume we got it mixed up except for White Labs confirming.

1. Maybe.
2. Yes
3. I don’t know.

I see the second link in my post no longer works.

AFAIK, WY1056 came from Sierra Nevada, cultured from a bottle.
I looked at the tree in the first link. 1056 and 001 are not far apart on the branches. Are they closely related?
I don’t know.

It will take time before all of this is sorted out.

34
Correct me if I'm wrong but the working hypothesis is now that -

Ballantine Ale became BRY 97 and was sold to Anchor. This is sold to us as Wyeast 1056, WLP051, or S-05. White Labs confirmed this is indeed technically a lager strain.

Ballantine Beer became BRY96 and was sold to Sierra Nevada. This is sold to us as WLP001.

A few questions:
1) Would this imply that Ballantine was using an ale strain for lager and a lager strain for ale?
2) Is this is the reverse of Mark's theory (which made sense) that Sierra was using a lager strain?
3) Is their a Wyeast or dry equivalent for Sierra Nevada?

I would assume we got it mixed up except for White Labs confirming.

1. Maybe.
2. Yes
3. I don’t know.

I see the second link in my post no longer works.

35
I hadn't paid close enough attention to this:

•WLP-051=Wyeat 1056= BRY-97 = Ballantine’s Ale strain/ Anchor’s Ale strain, which is now found to be a lager strain.

•WLP-001 = BRY-96 = Ballantine’s Beer Strain = Chico Ale yeast. Still classified as Ale as far as I know.

So Ballantine was making its ale with pastorianus and its lager ("beer" in the old parlance with cerevisiae?  (A quick look at their history suggests the products were segregated between the two breweries in Newark, unless I'm missing something.)  It was backwards from the start?

The thinking before was that BRY-97 = Wyeast 1272 = WLP051 = Ballantine Ale, and that BRY-96 = Wyeast 1056 = WLP001 = Ballantine Beer, right?

Any idea, anybody, if it works well pitched at 50°F, maybe at lager pitch rates, or does it just keep going if temperature is dropped during fermentation? 

I've never pitched 1056 that low, but I once tried to crash a starter of it at high krausen in the fridge, and it just kept chugging along.

Things have been turned upside down. It might be a few years before all of the dust settles.

36
I think it is experiment time ....It stands to reason that 1056 would handle lager temps.  However it also points to the need to toss out a lot of the yeast substitution charts that are out there.  US - 05 does not perform well at lager temps based on my experiences and now seeing that it definitively isn’t the equivalent of Wy1056, it makes sense.

Yet, according to a lawsuit when 05 came out, it comes directly from 1056.  I agree with your observation, but I can't explain it.
I remember it was US-56 or US-056 at first, then the name changed. Was it a full lawsuit, or a C&D?

37
I guess you had some typos then. You say 1056 = 051 = bry-97 = Chico. But Chico does not equal 1056?

Things that are equal to other things are also equal to eachother, usually.

I said this.
“The Chico strain has been said to be from Ballantine’s “beer” brewery, the Bry-97/Wlp-051 was from the Ballantine Ale Brewery. Now it is said that the Ale yeast is actually a lager yeast.  If S. Cervisiae was still active, I would be interested on his take on this.”
Mark had said Chico=BRY-96 from the beer brewery. The Ale Brewery used BRY-97 which is the same as WLP-051 (Anchors “Ale” strain. If BRY-97 as dry strain is a lager, the long lag times may be due to that, I.e. we need to pitch a lot more.
I was going off this... "The first link says 1056 is the same as Wlp-051.
The second link is from White Labs. Go to Wlp-051. It says that it is now classified as a Sach. Pastorianus strain I.e. a lager strain. So 1056 and WLP-051 are said to be classified as lager strains now." In conjunction with the rest. So... whatever.

If all of the study is correct, then.

WLP-051=Wyeat 1056= BRY-97 = Ballantine’s Ale strain/ Anchor’s Ale strain, which is now found to be a lager strain.

WLP-001 = BRY-96 = Ballantine’s Beer Strain = Chico Ale yeast. Still classified as Ale as far as I know.

Hope this helps.

38
The Ale Brewery used BRY-97 which is the same as WLP-051 (Anchors “Ale” strain.

Well now I just want to know what BSI-72/WY1272 is...
Yeah same here.

39
I guess you had some typos then. You say 1056 = 051 = bry-97 = Chico. But Chico does not equal 1056?

Things that are equal to other things are also equal to eachother, usually.

I said this.
“The Chico strain has been said to be from Ballantine’s “beer” brewery, the Bry-97/Wlp-051 was from the Ballantine Ale Brewery. Now it is said that the Ale yeast is actually a lager yeast.  If S. Cervisiae was still active, I would be interested on his take on this.”
Mark had said Chico=BRY-96 from the beer brewery. The Ale Brewery used BRY-97 which is the same as WLP-051 (Anchors “Ale” strain. If BRY-97 as dry strain is a lager, the long lag times may be due to that, I.e. we need to pitch a lot more.

40
I'm not Mark, but I'm not at all surprised by the idea that 1056 might be a lager strain. If not it's an ale strain that is so clean it might as well be, and it's an ale strain that works well at 50F...

Edit:
Once this is settled, it will rock the beer world when people are forced to admit that SNPA is actually an American Pilsner.

The Chico strain has been said to be similar to WLP-001, 1056 was found to be different from 001.

Founders said that they use 1056 at the NHC in Grand Rapids. That is the rock the beer world fact, Founders is a Lager Brewey! Well if you think yeast defines a lager or ale brewery.

One thing that has been said, in a few years we will rethink the difference between Ales and lagers.

41
I came across a post on “Milk the Funk” that started some travel down a rabbit hole. I know from a previous dive down the yeast genome rabbit hole that Wyeast 1056 was not the same as WLP-001. The first link says 1056 is the same as Wlp-051.
The second link is from White Labs. Go to Wlp-051. It says that it is now classified as a Sach. Pastorianus strain I.e. a lager strain. So 1056 and WLP-051 are said to be classified as lager strains now. Some lager strains were previously said to be found as ale strains.
Mind blown!

Oh, and yeast originated in China. Saw that before.

The Chico strain has been said to be from Ballantine’s “beer” brewery, the Bry-97/Wlp-051 was from the Ballantine Ale Brewery. Now it is said that the Ale yeast is actually a lager yeast.  If S. Cervisiae was still active, I would be interested on his take on this.

http://beer.suregork.com/?p=4000

https://www.whitelabs.com/sites/default/files/White%20Labs%202018%20Catalog.pdf


42
The Pub / Re: Inaugural Brew Day
« on: April 29, 2018, 05:13:19 PM »
I hope she enjoyed the brew day.

43
Classifieds / Re: Free Pound of Willamette
« on: April 28, 2018, 08:41:05 PM »
Clearing out some space in the hop freezer, these are 2015 crop (Hops Direct, pellet, 5.6% AA) but still flushed/sealed and have been frozen since. They'll ship in the Priority box with an ice pack for $6, or if you're at NHC we could hand them off.
I have a backlog of hops to work through, but it will be good to see you in Portland.


44
Northern Brewers Dead Ringer is a Two Hearted Ale clone.

45
All Grain Brewing / Re: Mash pH temperature correction?
« on: April 28, 2018, 12:30:21 PM »
When referencing Mash PH, it's almost always at room temperature that you should target and measure. 
Not almost always.  Always.  pH always refers to pH measured under standard reference conditions,  or it is meaningless.  In brewing that has always meant 20°C, and remember that if your meter has ATC,  that only corrects for the function of the electrode, not the actual change in mash chemistry at different temperatures. You must still measure pH at room temperature.

+1. Room Temperature. RDWHAHB.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 587