[BBTNT]

Hi all,

I've got a recipe for a tripel that I wanted to try out and wanted to get it dryer than the WLP500 will but still keep the fun ester/phenols it gives me.  My idea is to drop in a high attenuation diastatic yeast about a month into the fermentation (Yeast Bay's Dry Abbey Yeast; 85-100% att diastatic) and let it go at about 72 degrees F for another month after, then lager for a couple months.  My main concern is that the diastatic secondary will nom up the flavor characteristics of the original abbey, even though I'm only giving it the end chunk/bigger glucose bits.

Does anyone have any sage advice to throw a madman?

[hopfenundmalz]

Or you could put in some amyloglucosidase towards the end of primary. Available at many Homebrew shops, cheap stuff.

[BBTNT]

The end goals is to take a big beer (OG 1.097) and chomp it down to a dry FG.  If I use amyloglucosidase (AG), I'm worried that the sugars will still be there in shorter form when the original yeast (attenuation < 80%) reaches its ceiling; but I'm making a lot of assumptions on what the enzyme is doing because of my amateurness lol. 

Basically, does chopping up my beefy glucose strands with AG make for a dryer final product or do I actually need to do something with those shorter sugars after they're chopped?

[hopfenundmalz]

That enzyme is essentially what the yeast produce.

Have you considered just fermenting with 3711?

[BBTNT]

Another strain is definitely an option but 3711's attenuation isn't much higher than 500's (as listed, let me know if your experience is different).  at 83% it won't get it down to a dry FG (at least not as dry as I'm looking for).  3711 is also diastatic so we run into the same issue of "does removing the glucose get rid of the ester/phenol business produced by the original yeast". 

Thank you for your responses and sorry I'm so new!

[denny]

The key to attenuation lies much more in the wort than the yeast.

[hopfenundmalz]

Another strain is definitely an option but 3711's attenuation isn't much higher than 500's (as listed, let me know if your experience is different).  at 83% it won't get it down to a dry FG (at least not as dry as I'm looking for).  3711 is also diastatic so we run into the same issue of "does removing the glucose get rid of the ester/phenol business produced by the original yeast". 

Thank you for your responses and sorry I'm so new!

My experience, a pro brewer friend's experience, and these guy's experience says it will chew through a beer. The mouthfeel is good, as some say it produces a lot of glycerol.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/ridonkulous-attenuation-wyeast-3711.475129/&ved=2ahUKEwi2pYyet5zmAhWJY98KHRU3BGMQFjABegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0QdJIodwAHaGU9b72qaqyQ&cshid=1575477793114

Your beer, your decision.

[BBTNT]

The key to attenuation lies much more in the wort than the yeast.

OK so here's what I've got in the wort department:

Mash:
9lbs 2row
9lbs Vienna
2lbs malted Rye

(39 IBU if that matters
1oz Herkules 60min
1oz Delta 10min wp)

projected OG 1.097 and I always aerate responsibly

If I drop an 80% attenuator in there to start with and let it finish, it will leave me with a projected FG of 1.022.  I want it dryer though but STILL want the phenols & esters from the particular WLP500.  The advice I'm looking for is if anyone that has followed up a ferment with a second fermentation with a separate yeast.

The one I want to use is a diastatic 80-100% attenuator and I assumed, with the primary done, it will have that last 20% of the wort to nom on, getting rid of sugars and drying out the big beer.  Buuuuut I'm not a chemist/biologist and have no experience with a second staged yeast (I've pitched 2 before, but this is a bit different) and am worried that the tasty tasty phenol/esters will get wrecked by the second ferment. 

[BBTNT]

Another strain is definitely an option but 3711's attenuation isn't much higher than 500's (as listed, let me know if your experience is different).  at 83% it won't get it down to a dry FG (at least not as dry as I'm looking for).  3711 is also diastatic so we run into the same issue of "does removing the glucose get rid of the ester/phenol business produced by the original yeast". 

Thank you for your responses and sorry I'm so new!

My experience, a pro brewer friend's experience, and these guy's experience says it will chew through a beer. The mouthfeel is good, as some say it produces a lot of glycerol.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/ridonkulous-attenuation-wyeast-3711.475129/&ved=2ahUKEwi2pYyet5zmAhWJY98KHRU3BGMQFjABegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0QdJIodwAHaGU9b72qaqyQ&cshid=1575477793114

Your beer, your decision.

OoOooOoO this sounds GREAT.  90% would be perfect and hit right in the middle of the target FG for me.  I'ma take this 3711 "beast of a yeast" haha.

Thanks for the advice guys, I'll let you know how it all ends up.

[denny]

The key to attenuation lies much more in the wort than the yeast.

OK so here's what I've got in the wort department:

Mash:
9lbs 2row
9lbs Vienna
2lbs malted Rye

(39 IBU if that matters
1oz Herkules 60min
1oz Delta 10min wp)

projected OG 1.097 and I always aerate responsibly

If I drop an 80% attenuator in there to start with and let it finish, it will leave me with a projected FG of 1.022.  I want it dryer though but STILL want the phenols & esters from the particular WLP500.  The advice I'm looking for is if anyone that has followed up a ferment with a second fermentation with a separate yeast.

The one I want to use is a diastatic 80-100% attenuator and I assumed, with the primary done, it will have that last 20% of the wort to nom on, getting rid of sugars and drying out the big beer.  Buuuuut I'm not a chemist/biologist and have no experience with a second staged yeast (I've pitched 2 before, but this is a bit different) and am worried that the tasty tasty phenol/esters will get wrecked by the second ferment.

A few random comments....

That's way too high an OG for a tripel.  The ABV of a tripel depends on a lw FG not a high OG

You have no sugar in there.  Not only is it pretty much standard for a tripel, bit not using it 2 I'll seriously limit the attenuation you can get.

With that grist, no matter what yeast you use, you likely won't get the kind of attenuation you're looking for.  Keep in mind that the attenuation rating of a yeast is simply a way of comparing it to another yeast, not an indication of the attenuation you'll necessarily get.

My advice is to let this one ride, take what you get, and reformulate the recipe for next time.

[BBTNT]

A few random comments....

That's way too high an OG for a tripel.  The ABV of a tripel depends on a lw FG not a high OG

You have no sugar in there.  Not only is it pretty much standard for a tripel, bit not using it 2 I'll seriously limit the attenuation you can get.

With that grist, no matter what yeast you use, you likely won't get the kind of attenuation you're looking for.  Keep in mind that the attenuation rating of a yeast is simply a way of comparing it to another yeast, not an indication of the attenuation you'll necessarily get.

My advice is to let this one ride, take what you get, and reformulate the recipe for next time.

Yea, haha [airquotes] "tripel" [/airquotes]. 

Thanks for the advice!  I didn't know that about attenuation.  I thought it was just the percentage of the wort sugars the yeast consumes on average. 

I'm going to go with hopfenundmalz's suggestion of WLP3711.  I will desperately try to remember to update this to let you know how it rides!

[denny]

A few random comments....

That's way too high an OG for a tripel.  The ABV of a tripel depends on a lw FG not a high OG

You have no sugar in there.  Not only is it pretty much standard for a tripel, bit not using it 2 I'll seriously limit the attenuation you can get.

With that grist, no matter what yeast you use, you likely won't get the kind of attenuation you're looking for.  Keep in mind that the attenuation rating of a yeast is simply a way of comparing it to another yeast, not an indication of the attenuation you'll necessarily get.

My advice is to let this one ride, take what you get, and reformulate the recipe for next time.

Yea, haha [airquotes] "tripel" [/airquotes]. 

Thanks for the advice!  I didn't know that about attenuation.  I thought it was just the percentage of the wort sugars the yeast consumes on average. 

I'm going to go with hopfenundmalz's suggestion of WLP3711.  I will desperately try to remember to update this to let you know how it rides!

Isn't 3711 Wyeast?  Does White have one, too?

[jeffy]

A few random comments....

That's way too high an OG for a tripel.  The ABV of a tripel depends on a lw FG not a high OG

You have no sugar in there.  Not only is it pretty much standard for a tripel, bit not using it 2 I'll seriously limit the attenuation you can get.

With that grist, no matter what yeast you use, you likely won't get the kind of attenuation you're looking for.  Keep in mind that the attenuation rating of a yeast is simply a way of comparing it to another yeast, not an indication of the attenuation you'll necessarily get.

My advice is to let this one ride, take what you get, and reformulate the recipe for next time.

Yea, haha [airquotes] "tripel" [/airquotes]. 

Thanks for the advice!  I didn't know that about attenuation.  I thought it was just the percentage of the wort sugars the yeast consumes on average. 

I'm going to go with hopfenundmalz's suggestion of WLP3711.  I will desperately try to remember to update this to let you know how it rides!

Isn't 3711 Wyeast?  Does White have one, too?

It's the French Saison yeast

[denny]

A few random comments....

That's way too high an OG for a tripel.  The ABV of a tripel depends on a lw FG not a high OG

You have no sugar in there.  Not only is it pretty much standard for a tripel, bit not using it 2 I'll seriously limit the attenuation you can get.

With that grist, no matter what yeast you use, you likely won't get the kind of attenuation you're looking for.  Keep in mind that the attenuation rating of a yeast is simply a way of comparing it to another yeast, not an indication of the attenuation you'll necessarily get.

My advice is to let this one ride, take what you get, and reformulate the recipe for next time.

Yea, haha [airquotes] "tripel" [/airquotes]. 

Thanks for the advice!  I didn't know that about attenuation.  I thought it was just the percentage of the wort sugars the yeast consumes on average. 

I'm going to go with hopfenundmalz's suggestion of WLP3711.  I will desperately try to remember to update this to let you know how it rides!

Isn't 3711 Wyeast?  Does White have one, too?

It's the French Saison yeast

Yeah, I know.  But does White call it 3711 also?  Since I don't use White, I honestly don't know

[ynotbrusum]

I am not certain if it has been genotyped for equivalence, but WLP 590 is a French Saison (POF+ with diastaticus), I believe.