[Joe Sr.]

OK, let me rephrase: there's no real conclusion to this thread.

Quite right. 

Often, quite frequently here you'll get a wide range of opinions, a whole lot of conflicting first hand experiences, and you'll just have to go and try it yourself.

Don't ask if you should rehydrate or not.

[erockrph]

OK, let me rephrase: there's no real conclusion to this thread.

I think the takeaway is that many dry yeasts can be quite good. Which ones (if any) suit your tastes and needs will depend on a lot of factors, and can only be determined by you. That's as good of an answer as you're going to get on many topics here. Hopefully there's enough here to point you in the right direction.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

OK, let me rephrase: there's no real conclusion to this thread.

I think the takeaway is that many dry yeasts can be quite good. Which ones (if any) suit your tastes and needs will depend on a lot of factors, and can only be determined by you. That's as good of an answer as you're going to get on many topics here. Hopefully there's enough here to point you in the right direction.

well said.  great example of this is I just used Notti in my irish ale (same recipe i use some of the liquid english ale yeasts with). and now speaking from experience, I can say that Im not happy with notti for this recipe.

will drink it and move on....there are worse things.

[aokeovn]

Well, it's a good exemple.  coque xperia e3 etui samsung galaxy A5

[Steve Ruch]

US-05 and S-04 always on hand.  I also keep packets of Nottingham for my ciders.  Recently I did an Octoberfest with 34/70 which worked very well...I just need to adjust the recipe (it was v 1.0).

I got good results on a O-fest with S-189. Over the summer I brewed a coconut cider with Munton's that turned out real good.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

OK, let me rephrase: there's no real conclusion to this thread.

I think the takeaway is that many dry yeasts can be quite good. Which ones (if any) suit your tastes and needs will depend on a lot of factors, and can only be determined by you. That's as good of an answer as you're going to get on many topics here. Hopefully there's enough here to point you in the right direction.

well said.  great example of this is I just used Notti in my irish ale (same recipe i use some of the liquid english ale yeasts with). and now speaking from experience, I can say that Im not happy with notti for this recipe.

will drink it and move on....there are worse things.

I must confess I was wrong. Made a rookie mistake and passed judgement on the first pint (forgetting it was going to be loaded with gelatin). That first pint tasted extremely blah....after clearing the gelatin it's a very nice roasty malt pint of fine Irish ale....embarrassed but happy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Steve Ruch]

I keep 05 on hand for emergencies.  I used to use it pretty regularly, but started detecting some things from it I didn't care for.  I'd use S-189 and 34/70 more often if they were readily available, but I order stuff so seldom that I never have those on hand.  Don't care much for 04 or Notty.

Denny,
Atlantic Brew Supply has S-189 in homebrew size packets and they have a USPS option for shipping, so if you only wanted enough to try it out the shipping would be pretty low. Brew brothers in Hillsboro some times has it and a USPS option also.

[coolman26]

I've never tried S-189.  I do like 34/70, but I've had off peach flavors from 05.  I do like many dry yeasts.  Usually about time, but I prefer liquid.  I really like 1450.  I have been building a huge starter all week.  You just can't get some profiles from dry.  I've never rehydrated.  I just pitch more yeast and go on.  I always figured one more step to pick some nasty up.  Gonna try Notty in a cider next week.  Just bought some BRY-97.  Guess I'll face the lag!  I hear it is dry Pacman.  I do like Pacman in liquid.  Dry is good and easy.  Like a rib, some like'm dry, some like'm wet. 

[Wort-H.O.G.]

I've never tried S-189.  I do like 34/70, but I've had off peach flavors from 05.  I do like many dry yeasts.  Usually about time, but I prefer liquid.  I really like 1450.  I have been building a huge starter all week.  You just can't get some profiles from dry.  I've never rehydrated.  I just pitch more yeast and go on.  I always figured one more step to pick some nasty up.  Gonna try Notty in a cider next week.  Just bought some BRY-97.  Guess I'll face the lag!  I hear it is dry Pacman.  I do like Pacman in liquid.  Dry is good and easy.  Like a rib, some like'm dry, some like'm wet.

yeah I feel its the limitation of strains of dry yeast-not the dry yeast itself. If your favorite liquid was available dry, would you use it and would it produce the same results.....

[narcout]

Just bought some BRY-97.  Guess I'll face the lag!  I hear it is dry Pacman.

BRY-97 is Wyeast 1272 (American Ale II).

[coolman26]

BRY-97 is Wyeast 1272 (American Ale II).
[/quote]

Hmm good to know.  I read it was Pacman.  I've never used 1272.   

[S. cerevisiae]

BRY-97 is Wyeast 1272 (American Ale II).

Hmm good to know.  I read it was Pacman.  I've never used 1272.
[/quote]

BRY 97 is the same strain as Anchor Ale, WLP051, and Wyeast 1272.  Evidence points to BRY 97 being a Ballantine yeast strain.  BRY 96 is also a Ballantine yeast strain.  BRY 96 is the same strain as "Chico," Wyeast 1056, WLP001, and US-05.

[hopfenundmalz]

BRY-97 is Wyeast 1272 (American Ale II).

Hmm good to know.  I read it was Pacman.  I've never used 1272.

BRY 97 is the same strain as Anchor Ale, WLP051, and Wyeast 1272.  Evidence points to BRY 97 being a Ballentine yeast strain.  BRY 96 is also a Ballentine yeast strain.  BRY 96 is the same strain as "Chico," Wyeast 1056, WLP001, and US-05.
[/quote]

Would those 2 yeasts have been used together at Ballantine? BRY 97 is such a slow starter, 96 would be the starter, 97 the finisher.

Toured the Young's Ram brewery a long time ago before it closed. The tour guide pointed out the 3 different rings on the open fermenter, he claimed they had a starter yeast, a workhorse, then a finisher.

Something that just popped in to my mind today.

[S. cerevisiae]

Would those 2 yeasts have been used together at Ballantine? BRY 97 is such a slow starter, 96 would be the starter, 97 the finisher.

That's a good question. Thus far, the evidence points to BRY 97 being used at the large brewery site.  That site also contained a maltings in addition to an ale brewery.  Ballantine acquired the Schalk Brothers Brewery in 1879.  Schalk Brothers became indebted to Ballantine because Ballantine produced malt in addition to beer.  Schalk Brothers brewed lager "beer."  It is believed that BRY 96 (a.k.a. "Chico") was used at the former Schalk brewery to produce Ballantine's "beer" offering, which explains the culture's good low temperature performance.  If we search the ARS NRRL Collection for cultures deposited by Ballantine, we find the following accessions:


Y-7407  Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meyen ex E. C. Hansen (1883)
        G.W. Lange, Ballentine, New Jersey
        BR, Beer pitching yeast, Ballentine Brewery, New Jersey, USA


Y-7408  Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meyen ex E. C. Hansen (1883)
        Lange, Ballentine, Newark, New Jersey    
        BR, Ale pitching yeast



Did you notice that the cultures are entered in the same order in the ARS NRRL Collection as they are in the Siebel collection?  That's no coincidence.

BRY 96  = Y-7407
BRY 97  = Y-7408

It is well known that Sierra Nevada obtained "Chico" from Siebel as BRY 96.   It is now assumed that Anchor obtained their ale yeast strain from Siebel as BRY 97 (i.e., BRY 97 = Anchor, not Pac Man). 

With that said, if you repitch BRY 97, you will discover that it behaves like any other ale strain with respect to lag time.  This difference in performance leads me to believe that BRY 97 does not take kindly to aerobic propagation and drying.  I am curious to see if a really fresh pack of BRY 97 takes as long to start.  However, my local home brewing supplier does not turn BRY 97 over fast enough for me to be able obtain a really fresh specimen, which is too bad because BRY 97 is a much a better ale strain than BRY 96 from a mouth feel and malt profile point of view.  BRY 97 may be the first dry ale yeast strain to benefit from making a starter.   That's how I plan to use the remaining package of BRY 97 that is in my brewing refrigerator.

One last thing, here's a photo of a large open fermentation vessel at the Ballantine ale brewery.  That head looks more like BRY 97 than it does BRY 96.

[erockrph]

It would be interesting to split a batch between a fresh pack of BRY-97 and a fresh pack of WY1272 or WLP051 based on this information.