[Wort-H.O.G.]

I am drinking a pale ale as we speak made with us-05.....great beer.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AmandaK]

Our club did a huge brew and split up batches for yeast comparisons. SUPER boring beer, but informative.

US-05 vs 1056 vs 1272

US-05 was more peachy than both of the others. 1272 was the cleanest, and 1056 had a touch more esters than 1272, but less than US-05. All very subtle, but noticeable.

[majorvices]

10 bucks says no one on this forum can tell them apart (finished product).

[flbrewer]

I do like the idea of one less step without a starter. Perhaps I'll stick w US 05 for a bit.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

Our club did a huge brew and split up batches for yeast comparisons. SUPER boring beer, but informative.

US-05 vs 1056 vs 1272

US-05 was more peachy than both of the others. 1272 was the cleanest, and 1056 had a touch more esters than 1272, but less than US-05. All very subtle, but noticeable.

What was the beer?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AmandaK]

Our club did a huge brew and split up batches for yeast comparisons. SUPER boring beer, but informative.

US-05 vs 1056 vs 1272

US-05 was more peachy than both of the others. 1272 was the cleanest, and 1056 had a touch more esters than 1272, but less than US-05. All very subtle, but noticeable.

What was the beer?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

10 gallons for each brewer, split into ~3 gallons for each pitch. 1.050 beer, 90% Best Pils, 10% Best Munich. Magnum to 30 IBUs. Pitched a very fresh smack pack for the Wyeast yeasts into 3 gallons and a normal US-05, not rehydrated, into 3 gallons as well. Ferment at 64f for these three.

3/4 of our members at the meeting could tell the difference. My mom was there, strangely enough, and she could pick out the US-05 but not the two Wyeast yeasts.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

Our club did a huge brew and split up batches for yeast comparisons. SUPER boring beer, but informative.

US-05 vs 1056 vs 1272

US-05 was more peachy than both of the others. 1272 was the cleanest, and 1056 had a touch more esters than 1272, but less than US-05. All very subtle, but noticeable.

What was the beer?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

10 gallons for each brewer, split into ~3 gallons for each pitch. 1.050 beer, 90% Best Pils, 10% Best Munich. Magnum to 30 IBUs. Pitched a very fresh smack pack for the Wyeast yeasts into 3 gallons and a normal US-05, not rehydrated, into 3 gallons as well. Ferment at 64f for these three.

3/4 of our members at the meeting could tell the difference. My mom was there, strangely enough, and she could pick out the US-05 but not the two Wyeast yeasts.

So i can see picking out some differences with that grist and hops. I do ferment cooler at around 60f. In a pale or ipa I've never perceived peach out of us-05.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AmandaK]

Yeah, we did an intentionally boring beer so we could find the differences.  I feel like it would be easily covered by many hops, but I have gotten peach previously and couldn't figure out why the hops were a touch peachy. Now I know.

[dannyjed]

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've noticed this also as the main difference between US-05 and WY1056. I've had US-05 attenuate to 82% and I've never had WY1056 go over 75%.

[69franx]

I also seem to get better attenuation out of 05. I have hit 81.5% the last 2 times I used it. Off the top of my head I think I get 78% off first pitches with 001 and I have not used 1056. I haven't picked up peach, but might not even know it if I did

[S. cerevisiae]

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

As far as I am concerned, US-05 is significantly different than 1056 and WLP001 on the initial pitch, which I believe can be attributed aerobic propagation in a bioreactor.  In fact, I do not particularly care for US-05 on the initial pitch.  US-05 behaves more like 1056 and WLP001 on repitching.

Ballantine "Beer" -> Siebel BRY 96 -> Sierra Nevada "Chico" -> Wyeast 1056 & WLP001

Dry form Danstar US-05



Ballantine "Ale" -> Siebel BRY 97 -> Anchor Liberty Ale -> Wyeast 1272 & WLP051

Dry form Lallemand BRY 97

[AmandaK]

US-05 behaves more like 1056 and WLP001 on repitching.

I have also heard this from some of our brewers and one professional brewer in the area. Problem is, with the price... why not just buy the others?

[dmtaylor]

Why is dry yeast better?  It's convenient skipping the starter, dry yeast keeps 5 times longer than liquid yeast, yadda yadda......

[majorvices]

10 bucks says no one on this forum can tell them apart (finished product).

when I typed this I meant between 1056 and 001. I do think there's a slight difference with US-05 that is detectable (though not necessarily bad).

FTR for my IPA and IIPA at YHB I use US-05. I don't really think there is a quality improvement for hoppy US beers in using the liquid equivalent. For all other beers (mostly German and Belgian) I use Wyeast.

[HoosierBrew]

I agree, I don't think anybody anywhere could tell any difference between 001 and 1056.  I like and use S05 occasionally, but I could pick it out of the three.  I'm a little surprised the 1272 was picked as the cleanest, but I usually ferment American ales around 63-64F and it's pretty clean at that temp, fruitier at slightly warmer temps. I don't know that I ever felt it was cleaner than 1056, though.  I like 1272  - need to use it again soon.