[flbrewer]

Any significant difference?

[S. cerevisiae]

No

[Wort-H.O.G.]

WLP001 and WY1056 are very similar and both originally reported to be from Sierra Nevada...Mark any insight on this?

[Wort-H.O.G.]

FWIW, after using both WLP001 and WLP090, Im a big fan of WLP090...all I use now.

http://brulosophy.com/tag/yeast-comparison/

[dsmitch19]

To my knowledge, WLP001, Wyeast 1056 and Safale US-05 are all the same strain.

[narcout]

WLP001 and WY1056 are very similar and both originally reported to be from Sierra Nevada...Mark any insight on this?

Oh man, you're going to give S.C. a heart attack.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

WLP001 and WY1056 are very similar and both originally reported to be from Sierra Nevada...Mark any insight on this?

Oh man, you're going to give S.C. a heart attack.

ha! just a question about what people have said 

[denny]

To my knowledge, WLP001, Wyeast 1056 and Safale US-05 are all the same strain.

They may have started from the same source (kinda) but there are differences.  FWIW, I know for a fact that 05 came from 1056, so it's source wasn't identical to 001 and 1056.

[dmtaylor]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

[klickitat jim]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I surprised myself on my current IPA going from 1.060 to 1.006 in 7 days with 1056 at 63°

[brewday]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I surprised myself on my current IPA going from 1.060 to 1.006 in 7 days with 1056 at 63°

Maybe it's the O2 rich high krausen starter pitch?

[flbrewer]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I don't know why I assume any dry yeast is not as good as liquid yeast.

[Iliff Ave]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I don't know why I assume any dry yeast is not as good as liquid yeast.

That is a myth in my opinion. It all depends on what you are brewing. The truth is there are not as many dry yeast strains so you are limited to what you can brew stylistically.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I don't know why I assume any dry yeast is not as good as liquid yeast.

Give yourself sometime. You'll have some us-05, s-04, Nottingham, etc on hand for those spur of the moment brews. Then you can draw your comparisons. You can make great beer with dry yeast.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[flbrewer]

With any yeast strains that are so-called equivalent, there will always be differences since the yeast evolves over time.  Now, the differences could be very slight, or very significant.  In this case, the three strains are all similar enough that most people don't care too much.  Personally I like US-05 which I believe is the most attenuative of the bunch, close to 80% with the others more around mid-70s for attenuation (all roughly on the average and recipe-dependent, of course).

I don't know why I assume any dry yeast is not as good as liquid yeast.

Give yourself sometime. You'll have some us-05, s-04, Nottingham, etc on hand for those spur of the moment brews. Then you can draw your comparisons. You can make great beer with dry yeast.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I always have some packs of S-05. I just feel that making a starter w. liquid seems better!