[69franx]

I recently brewed Evil Twin from Mr. Malty. My batch was the extract version. I had to make some adjustments due to availability, but was lucky enough to find Amarillo for it. My question comes down to my yeast:  original recipe calls for WLP 001 and I made a starter for it. The recipe called for pitching temp at 68, vial called for pitching and holding at 70. Is one better than the other, and why the difference. Next problem is that I set up a freezer with temp controller, but it is now too cold in Indiana in my basement(only place my SO allows me to keep it) to hold at even that temp. It has been chugging away at 66 since last Monday, so I have no doubts that the yeast is doing its job, I am just curious what to expect out of this brew. Its the first time I have made it, so there will be no comparison for me, just figure i wont get what recipe shoots for.

[morticaixavier]

66 is good. higher temps encourage faster metabolism, reproduction, and therefore ester development. At extremes it also encourages the development of higher alcohols that are nasty brain busters.

It's important to keep in mind as well whether you are talking about ambient or beer temps. At 66 ambient you are probably running a couple to a few degrees warmer in the beer. at high krausen it was likely a few more degrees higher. you are still probably fine though.

Colder fermentation will encourage slower metabolism and less ester production. Although us-05 is said to produce an apricot/peach ester at low temps that is not there or masked at higher temps.

Short answer is no worries. 66 is not too cold and 70 is probably right on the edge of too warm.

Also, if you have a two stage temp controller or the wiring know how to switch it, you can use your temp controller to control a heat source and heat the inside of your fridge during the winter.

[klickitat jim]

I think your fine. The cooler temp ought to reduce esters I would think. I've not used 001 but I use Wyeast 1056 which I'm told is similar. I prefer it run at low 60s. I get a cleaner result with a little tartness at the most, compared to the fruitier notes from fermenting higher. If it's similar to 1056 I'd be happy with what you're doing.

[theDarkSide]

The temperature on the vial is a general recommendation.  You are better to go with what the recipe calls for.  It will still ferment even at your 66F temp just fine.  Too high of a temp can lend itself to ester production and hot alcohol (although I doubt 70 as opposed to 68 would make much difference).

This one should turn out fine.  I love this beer!!

[69franx]

My temp readings were from adhesive thermo on side of glass carboy, which I think I've read is within 1-2 degrees of wort inside as liquid reads/transmits better/faster than the ambient air? Thanks for the input, was mainly just confused about variance from recipe to vial. Now I know, also cant wait to try it! The article got me interested in trying something different, hearing you like it really gets me stoked!

[69franx]

Also, now that I know what it means, RDWHAHB! Spent a couple weeks on here to get that info.

[klickitat jim]

I've not brewed that exact recipe but it's similar to a few ambers I've done. A little higher gravity than mine, and mine has a bitter addition and less late additions, but I'll bet it will be tasty. I love centennial amarillo in malty ambers. You'll be pleased.

As far as thermometer placement goes. I believe that it should be considered and noted in recipes. Strating with true internal temp, an attached thermometer should read a couple degrees cooler and an ambient thermometer in an enclosed chamber maybe another degree or two lower yet. I think the difference between true internal temp and ambient is effected by several things including but not limited to beer volume, OG, current krausen activity level, temp (higher temps increase activity). For me, I use ambient temp in an enclosed chamber and run it 3-4° below what I'd like the internal temp to be and I leave it there and let it do it's thing.

[cornershot]

That is a very tasty beer. I brewed it a while back and the guys in my club were nuts about it and still talk about it almost a year later!
The temperature recommendations on the vial are the same generic directions on every vial for every strain. Check White labs website for more strain-specific recommendations. http://www.whitelabs.com/beer/homebrew/listings

[HoosierBrew]

Yep, it's a very tasty brew.  FWIW I regularly start 1056/001/05 at  ~ 64F because, as Mort mentioned, you will be a few degrees above the temp you pitched at during high krausen. Yeast recommendations for temp are often general guidelines, so pitch on the low end or, optimally, pitch at least 2 or 3 degrees below the stated minimum and you'll have far superior results.

[repo]

There seems to be some confusion here on what the temps mean. When a recipe says to ferment at 68, that is the temperature of the beer.  Get it at 68 and keep it there. Just like pitching temp is the temp of the wort. Ambient temp is not what is being considered. If you are describing the ambient temp you ferment at, you don't actually know what temp you are fermenting at. You therefore cannot say ohh this yeast does great at 64(ambient), I do it all the time. Chances are that yeast is working around 70ish. Which would be actually fermenting warmer than someone actually fermenting the beer at 68.

Yep, it's a very tasty brew.  FWIW I regularly start 1056/001/05 at  ~ 64F because, as Mort mentioned, you will be a few degrees above the temp you pitched at during high krausen. Yeast recommendations for temp are often general guidelines, so pitch on the low end or, optimally, pitch at least 2 or 3 degrees below the stated minimum and you'll have far superior results.

This for example is very confusing, I have no idea what the fermentation temperature is being used here. Standard practice is to pitch a couple degrees cooler than you want to ferment at. So it is starting (pitching?) at 64, raising up to 66 (ambient?), then as things get going into the 70s. That would be my guess.

[HoosierBrew]

There seems to be some confusion here on what the temps mean. When a recipe says to ferment at 68, that is the temperature of the beer.  Get it at 68 and keep it there. Just like pitching temp is the temp of the wort. Ambient temp is not what is being considered. If you are describing the ambient temp you ferment at, you don't actually know what temp you are fermenting at. You therefore cannot say ohh this yeast does great at 64(ambient), I do it all the time. Chances are that yeast is working around 70ish. Which would be actually fermenting warmer than someone actually fermenting the beer at 68.

Yep, it's a very tasty brew.  FWIW I regularly start 1056/001/05 at  ~ 64F because, as Mort mentioned, you will be a few degrees above the temp you pitched at during high krausen. Yeast recommendations for temp are often general guidelines, so pitch on the low end or, optimally, pitch at least 2 or 3 degrees below the stated minimum and you'll have far superior results.

This for example is very confusing, I have no idea what the fermentation temperature is being used here. Standard practice is to pitch a couple degrees cooler than you want to ferment at. So it is starting (pitching?) at 64, raising up to 66 (ambient?), then as things get going into the 70s. That would be my guess.

Should have been more clear, but yes that is what I do for this yeast.

[bluesman]

Chico yeast or California Ale yeast WLP001 or WY1056 is an all around great yeast. It ferments clean at cooler temps 50's and has a milder fruity profile in the 60's. It's a workhorse yeast as well for higher gravity beers. I use this yeast for most of my hoppy beers.

As far as fernmentation of Evil Twin at a lower temp--->Go for it. It will turn out very fine. If I were to brew this beer. I would pitch at 62-64F. If the ambient temp in the room was 66F, I would expect the beer to warm up during high krausen to about 68-70F then drop down to ambient temp during flocculation.

[klickitat jim]

Like the old Sears Roebuck catalog (good, better, best) I think some temp control is good, ambient temp control in an enclosed chamber is better. I agree that internal temp is best. It seems to me that maintaining a precise zero change internal temp would be difficult with the mass changing on its own and the cooler/heater scrambling to keep up. There has to be some temp fluctuations.

[Pinski]

Like the old Sears Roebuck catalog (good, better, best) I think some temp control is good, ambient temp control in an enclosed chamber is better. I agree that internal temp is best. It seems to me that maintaining a precise zero change internal temp would be difficult with the mass changing on its own and the cooler/heater scrambling to keep up. There has to be some temp fluctuations.

This is why I generally target the ambient temperature in my chamber to be 4-5 degrees below ideal target for the yeast and profile I'm going for during active primary fermentation.  Then as things slow down I'll generally bump up the ambient temperature to approach the target for the beer. 

[klickitat jim]

Like the old Sears Roebuck catalog (good, better, best) I think some temp control is good, ambient temp control in an enclosed chamber is better. I agree that internal temp is best. It seems to me that maintaining a precise zero change internal temp would be difficult with the mass changing on its own and the cooler/heater scrambling to keep up. There has to be some temp fluctuations.

This is why I generally target the ambient temperature in my chamber to be 4-5 degrees below ideal target for the yeast and profile I'm going for during active primary fermentation.  Then as things slow down I'll generally bump up the ambient temperature to approach the target for the beer.

I think that's a good practice, especially when compared to just having it in a spare bedroom that fluctuates temp between 55° to 75° lol.