Author Topic: W34/70 vs S-189  (Read 14142 times)

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 23637
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • Dennybrew
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #30 on: November 23, 2016, 08:35:38 PM »

I had little to no issues with it when I basically treated the beer like an ale. Fermented warm, ramped temp up towards the end of fermentation.. I guess using all the standards that are taught today. However when low oxygen methods are implemented you really get clarity into where process and ingredients, can hurt flavor. Thats when the issues arose.

Interesting.  When I used it, it was with the traditional cold fermentation schedule, not the accelerated schedule.  Still no lemon.  Haven't used it since I started using the fast fermentation, but I haven't found it to make any difference with other lager yeasts.
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Online tommymorris

  • I spend way too much time on the AHA forum
  • ********
  • Posts: 2868
W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #31 on: November 23, 2016, 08:55:57 PM »
While the dry do start out life as the liquid strain equivalents, they don't really exhibit the same properties. For instance 34/70 can throw lemon( I have never had 2124/830 do that), and none throw enough sulfur to help you post fermentation. Also interestingly they don't have the same attenuation or floccuation characteristics. I have gone though my fair share of 500g bricks of both of these yeast, but for flavor and post fermentation protection nothing beats the liquid strains IMO, especially when you go with low oxygen brewing techniques. The game changes then.
Where I live (110 mi. to nearest LHBS), the convenience of having 6-8 different dry yeasts in the fridge is a big plus.
In my two lodo attempts so far, I've used dry yeasts in a SNS starter to get the yeast going strong and the cell count up.  Thoughts?

They don't fit the flavor profiles and characteristics I want in a lager yeast.
So, there is no technical problem with dry yeasts for lodo, it's just a flavor preference thing?

My two batches are still in the fermenter.

Besides not enough sulfur, its purely just flavor(or really off flavors).
I am curious about the sulfur. Do you prefer the flavor of sulfur? I know some German lagers have a sulfur flavor, but, personally, I am not a fan of that flavor. I prefer a yeast that doesn't leave sulfur flavor behind.

The Beerery

  • Guest
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #32 on: November 23, 2016, 08:58:10 PM »
While the dry do start out life as the liquid strain equivalents, they don't really exhibit the same properties. For instance 34/70 can throw lemon( I have never had 2124/830 do that), and none throw enough sulfur to help you post fermentation. Also interestingly they don't have the same attenuation or floccuation characteristics. I have gone though my fair share of 500g bricks of both of these yeast, but for flavor and post fermentation protection nothing beats the liquid strains IMO, especially when you go with low oxygen brewing techniques. The game changes then.
Where I live (110 mi. to nearest LHBS), the convenience of having 6-8 different dry yeasts in the fridge is a big plus.
In my two lodo attempts so far, I've used dry yeasts in a SNS starter to get the yeast going strong and the cell count up.  Thoughts?

They don't fit the flavor profiles and characteristics I want in a lager yeast.
So, there is no technical problem with dry yeasts for lodo, it's just a flavor preference thing?

My two batches are still in the fermenter.

Besides not enough sulfur, its purely just flavor(or really off flavors).
I am curious about the sulfur. Do you prefer the flavor of sulfur? I know some German lagers have a sulfur flavor, but, personally, I am not a fan of that flavor. I prefer a yeast that doesn't leave sulfur flavor behind.

I do, but just a touch. However sulfur is a great antioxidant and will help you post fermentation to keep low DO rates, preserving flavors and helping keep away the staling ones.

Offline duelerx

  • Cellarman
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #33 on: November 23, 2016, 10:06:54 PM »
I never used S-189, does this yeast bring the same maltiness as WLP-833?

Offline Steve Ruch

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1414
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2016, 10:25:00 PM »
I generally think pf 189 as more for malty styles and 34/70 for styles that don't have as much body.  Both are equally easy to use and reliable.  I think for a schwarz I'd go with the 34/70.

The last beer I used 34/70 on (pilsner) I got 84% attenuation and the last S-189 I used (maibock which got my second highest score ever) got 79%.
Yes on the Schwarz with 34/70.

So you agree that 189 is better suited for maltier lagers as well?

Yes.
Crescent City, CA

I love to go swimmin'
with hairy old women

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10102
  • Milford, MI
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #35 on: November 24, 2016, 12:23:14 AM »
I generally think pf 189 as more for malty styles and 34/70 for styles that don't have as much body.  Both are equally easy to use and reliable.  I think for a schwarz I'd go with the 34/70.

The last beer I used 34/70 on (pilsner) I got 84% attenuation and the last S-189 I used (maibock which got my second highest score ever) got 79%.
Yes on the Schwarz with 34/70.

So you agree that 189 is better suited for maltier lagers as well?

Yes.
Hurlimann used to brew Samichlaus. That is a Malty beer.  :o
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline HoosierBrew

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 13031
  • Indianapolis,IN
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #36 on: November 24, 2016, 12:33:53 AM »
Hurlimann used to brew Samichlaus. That is a Malty beer.  :o


Understatement. :)  I just tried a 10 year old Samichlaus courtesy of the owner of Great Fermentations (LHBS). I've tried it many times, never @ 10 years. It was fantastic.
Jon H.

Offline mabrungard

  • I spend way too much time on the AHA forum
  • ********
  • Posts: 2760
  • Water matters!
    • Bru'n Water
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #37 on: November 24, 2016, 01:13:53 AM »
The descriptions of S-189 and W34/70 on the yeast website says that the S-189 attenuates 1% more than 34/70. In addition, it says that 189 is less fruity and is cleaner.
Martin B
Carmel, IN

BJCP National
Foam Blowers of Indiana (FBI)

Brewing Water Information at:
https://www.brunwater.com/

Like Bru'n Water on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/Brun-Water-464551136933908/?ref=bookmarks

Offline BrewBama

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 4257
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #38 on: November 24, 2016, 01:33:16 AM »
Sadly I think they are both sad excuses for real yeast... sorry :(


I've used both with great results. I prefer dry yeast because I get ingredients thru the mail and have had a few unsuccessful results with liquid yeast. It's very 'real' for me. Cheers!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.” — St. Arnold

Brewed in the Tennessee Valley. Rocket City — Huntsville AL

The Beerery

  • Guest
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #39 on: November 24, 2016, 01:39:37 AM »
I generally think pf 189 as more for malty styles and 34/70 for styles that don't have as much body.  Both are equally easy to use and reliable.  I think for a schwarz I'd go with the 34/70.

The last beer I used 34/70 on (pilsner) I got 84% attenuation and the last S-189 I used (maibock which got my second highest score ever) got 79%.
Yes on the Schwarz with 34/70.

So you agree that 189 is better suited for maltier lagers as well?

Yes.
Hurlimann used to brew Samichlaus. That is a Malty beer.  :o



Bet they didn't brew it with the dry equivalent of their yeast! ;D. Sorry had to.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10102
  • Milford, MI
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #40 on: November 24, 2016, 03:50:58 AM »
I generally think pf 189 as more for malty styles and 34/70 for styles that don't have as much body.  Both are equally easy to use and reliable.  I think for a schwarz I'd go with the 34/70.

The last beer I used 34/70 on (pilsner) I got 84% attenuation and the last S-189 I used (maibock which got my second highest score ever) got 79%.
Yes on the Schwarz with 34/70.

So you agree that 189 is better suited for maltier lagers as well?

Yes.
Hurlimann used to brew Samichlaus. That is a Malty beer.  :o



Bet they didn't brew it with the dry equivalent of their yeast! ;D. Sorry had to.

No they didn't. i do find that some strains are close enough to use in a pinch. That is based on ale strains though.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline Iliff Ave

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3983
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #41 on: November 24, 2016, 06:11:49 AM »
The descriptions of S-189 and W34/70 on the yeast website says that the S-189 attenuates 1% more than 34/70. In addition, it says that 189 is less fruity and is cleaner.

Fermentis has about the worst descriptions of their own yeast...
On Tap/Bottled: Imperial Pils, IPA, Red Rye, Yellow Lager

Fermenting: Transcendent Eclipse IPA
Up Next: bangers & mash, Bopils

Offline Iliff Ave

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3983
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #42 on: November 24, 2016, 06:45:11 AM »
Thanks all. The goal of the thread was strictly to inquire about the differences between 34/70 and 189.

I have accepted that I am a lower tier of brewer because I don't employ LODO techniques or liquid yeast on most occasions. I get it...
« Last Edit: November 24, 2016, 06:47:04 AM by goschman »
On Tap/Bottled: Imperial Pils, IPA, Red Rye, Yellow Lager

Fermenting: Transcendent Eclipse IPA
Up Next: bangers & mash, Bopils

Offline PORTERHAUS

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 439
  • NW Indiana
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #43 on: November 24, 2016, 10:50:11 AM »
Thanks all. The goal of the thread was strictly to inquire about the differences between 34/70 and 189.

I have accepted that I am a lower tier of brewer because I don't employ LODO techniques or liquid yeast on most occasions. I get it...

Makes two of us, I have many good reasons TO use dry yeasts. Anyway, I'll be following this thread, it's been a good read already. I just used 34/70 for the first time with an Amber Lager. I have brewed this recipe many times using Wyeast Bohemian Lager (the "same" strain) so I am looking forward to how they compare. In the spring I plan on giving S-189 a try for a Bock, seems that will be very fitting for the yeast.

goschman, every try any Mangrove Jack yeasts? They really kicked up their selection. They have both Bohemian and Bavarian dry lager yeasts. I have used the Bohemian and a couple other of their yeasts.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10102
  • Milford, MI
Re: W34/70 vs S-189
« Reply #44 on: November 24, 2016, 11:06:25 AM »
Thanks all. The goal of the thread was strictly to inquire about the differences between 34/70 and 189.

I have accepted that I am a lower tier of brewer because I don't employ LODO techniques or liquid yeast on most occasions. I get it...
Brew the way you are comfortable brewing. Brew the way you can on your system. If you brew beer you like, you can be happy.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!