[narvin]

I used to be a yeast lothario, hopping from strain to strain as it pleased me, but with the pandemic and not living as close to my LHBS as I used to, I'm starting to save yeast slurry for short term reuse.  Some strains that I've considered keeping:

WLP007 - I find that this is good in a variety of styles.  Works well in both west coast and new england IPAs.
WLP530 - Workhorse for anything trappist or abbey style
WY2206 - Trying this out to replace WLP830 on the recommendation of Bryan from low oxygen brewing.  So far I think it works better in dark lagers than 830 and is still a nice yeast for south german pilsners.

[hopfenundmalz]

I used to be a yeast lothario, hopping from strain to strain as it pleased me, but with the pandemic and not living as close to my LHBS as I used to, I'm starting to save yeast slurry for short term reuse.  Some strains that I've considered keeping:

WLP007 - I find that this is good in a variety of styles.  Works well in both west coast and new england IPAs.
WLP530 - Workhorse for anything trappist or abbey style
WY2206 - Trying this out to replace WLP830 on the recommendation of Bryan from low oxygen brewing.  So far I think it works better in dark lagers than 830 and is still a nice yeast for south german pilsners.

I've done several split batches between 34/70 (and equivalents 830 or Diamond) to other lager yeasts and always prefer the 34/70 based ones for Pilsners. There is not always true for other lager styles.

[Bob357]

You might be right on the Liberty Bell being S-04. US West Coast is much more attenuative than BRY-97. We're talking 77 to 85% vs. 68 to 76%. It's a lot more flocculent than US-05 too, so I'd rule that out as well. I seldom use US West Coast, as I don't care for super dry beers as a rule. I have a suspicion that some of the MJ yeasts are blends, which would explain their not aligning well with some other popular strains as well as their recommending you not harvest for reuse.

I get identical performance from M44 and BRY-97. Both are pretty attentuative and pretty flocculant. Both have a 24-48 hour delay that I don't get from other dry yeasts. That said, it could be a blend. I am pretty sure the "New World Strong Ale" is Nottingham, in part because I deplore Nottingham -- it has a particular tartness that I dislike strongly. I recall a while back reading that it was "dry pacman" and so I tried it and immediately thought, "that's Notty." It took a long time for that keg to kick.

I don't see that kind of lag time with either strain. I do make a starter if needed to reach a reasonable pitching rate though. I seldom see more than 8 hours.

[Wilbur]

I don't think I have a house culture by any means, I overbuild my starters and save the excess. I've had good results with Bayern Lager and Hornindal kveik with this method. I also like the Omega's Tropical IPA. I don't think I can make all the styles I like with this combo though. I love Bayern for lagers and the farmhouse character of Hornindal is great but I don't have anything for a pale ale or red ale. I'd like to try Lutra and Bry-97.

The Lallemand pitch rate calculator limits you to 1.042 for a single 11g packet of yeast and a 5.5 gallon batch. Kind of makes me wonder why they settled on 11 g vs 14 (Good for up to 1.054).

https://www.lallemandbrewing.com/en/canada/brewers-corner/brewing-tools/pitching-rate-calculator/

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[narvin]

I used to be a yeast lothario, hopping from strain to strain as it pleased me, but with the pandemic and not living as close to my LHBS as I used to, I'm starting to save yeast slurry for short term reuse.  Some strains that I've considered keeping:

WLP007 - I find that this is good in a variety of styles.  Works well in both west coast and new england IPAs.
WLP530 - Workhorse for anything trappist or abbey style
WY2206 - Trying this out to replace WLP830 on the recommendation of Bryan from low oxygen brewing.  So far I think it works better in dark lagers than 830 and is still a nice yeast for south german pilsners.

I've done several split batches between 34/70 (and equivalents 830 or Diamond) to other lager yeasts and always prefer the 34/70 based ones for Pilsners. There is not always true for other lager styles.

I definitely enjoyed using 830 for a hoppy pilsner.  Now, the question is, how close is it actually to 34/70?   

http://beer.suregork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Brewing_yeast_tree_Oct_2019.pdf

[hopfenundmalz]

I used to be a yeast lothario, hopping from strain to strain as it pleased me, but with the pandemic and not living as close to my LHBS as I used to, I'm starting to save yeast slurry for short term reuse.  Some strains that I've considered keeping:

WLP007 - I find that this is good in a variety of styles.  Works well in both west coast and new england IPAs.
WLP530 - Workhorse for anything trappist or abbey style
WY2206 - Trying this out to replace WLP830 on the recommendation of Bryan from low oxygen brewing.  So far I think it works better in dark lagers than 830 and is still a nice yeast for south german pilsners.

I've done several split batches between 34/70 (and equivalents 830 or Diamond) to other lager yeasts and always prefer the 34/70 based ones for Pilsners. There is not always true for other lager styles.

I definitely enjoyed using 830 for a hoppy pilsner.  Now, the question is, how close is it actually to 34/70?   

http://beer.suregork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Brewing_yeast_tree_Oct_2019.pdf

I've seen that. I will just say that I get the dry finish with either of those. Been using Diamond now since it is a little cheaper.

Funny how many are described as the most widely used lager yeast in the world, then don't land close together on the tree.

[narvin]

I used to be a yeast lothario, hopping from strain to strain as it pleased me, but with the pandemic and not living as close to my LHBS as I used to, I'm starting to save yeast slurry for short term reuse.  Some strains that I've considered keeping:

WLP007 - I find that this is good in a variety of styles.  Works well in both west coast and new england IPAs.
WLP530 - Workhorse for anything trappist or abbey style
WY2206 - Trying this out to replace WLP830 on the recommendation of Bryan from low oxygen brewing.  So far I think it works better in dark lagers than 830 and is still a nice yeast for south german pilsners.

I've done several split batches between 34/70 (and equivalents 830 or Diamond) to other lager yeasts and always prefer the 34/70 based ones for Pilsners. There is not always true for other lager styles.

I definitely enjoyed using 830 for a hoppy pilsner.  Now, the question is, how close is it actually to 34/70?   

http://beer.suregork.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Brewing_yeast_tree_Oct_2019.pdf

I've seen that. I will just say that I get the dry finish with either of those. Been using Diamond now since it is a little cheaper.

Funny how many are described as the most widely used lager yeast in the world, then don't land close together on the tree.

It's interesting, I still don't know what to make of all of it.  But one of my old go-to yeasts for a Dunkel, WLP838, turns out to be an ale yeast now.  Strange times indeed.

And before anyone chimes in, no, it doesn't matter.  I'm just looking to take a single lager yeast and run with it for a while for other reasons.

[Saccharomyces]

I don't see that kind of lag time with either strain. I do make a starter if needed to reach a reasonable pitching rate though. I seldom see more than 8 hours.

I do not believe BRY-97's delayed start has anything to due with pitching rate because the delay is just too long.  It has to be due to an extended lag phase that is needed to get the culture to the point were exponential growth occurs.  It is apparent to me that that BRY-97 does not take well to the drying process because it acts like any other yeast culture when repitched.

As we have recently learned, BRY-97 is actually an isolate of BRY-96.  I have Siebel's culture spreadsheet.  On that spreadsheet, BRY-96 is labeled as being "slow."  The selective pressure put on what started out as BRY-96 at Sierra Nevada clearly selected for a faster performing yeast culture.

[Saccharomyces]

I use Bry-97 90+% of the time coupled with 2 tsp Fermax in a 5 gal batch.
...

When the proper pitch rate recommended by the mfr is used, I consistently see 16 hrs +/- 2 hr lag.  I brew in the AM which puts me in the fermenter by noon-ish and the next morning I can see where the first ‘blip’ on the Tilt was as I slept. It’s 14 hrs more often than not, but I have seen up to 18 hrs.  It is very predictable.

Looking at their datasheets

PITCHING RATE

50 - 100g/hL to achieve a minimum of 2.5 - 5 million cells/mL


if that information is correct, then we are looking at

log(200 / 2.5) / log(2) = 6.32 replication periods

log(200 / 5) / log(2)  = 5.32 replication periods


That difference in pitching rate does not result in reduction in time to the start of active fermentation by a factor of two.  We are talking about an actual extension of approximately 90 minutes between these two pitching rates, not 18 hours.  The reduction has to be due to your process.  You mentioned that you measure out your yeast.  Are you purchasing BRY-97 in bulk?  Do you aerate your wort?  If so, to what extent?  The addition of Fermax could help, but not be a factor of two.

[BrewBama]

I use Bry-97 90+% of the time coupled with 2 tsp Fermax in a 5 gal batch.
...

When the proper pitch rate recommended by the mfr is used, I consistently see 16 hrs +/- 2 hr lag.  I brew in the AM which puts me in the fermenter by noon-ish and the next morning I can see where the first ‘blip’ on the Tilt was as I slept. It’s 14 hrs more often than not, but I have seen up to 18 hrs.  It is very predictable.

Looking at their datasheets

PITCHING RATE

50 - 100g/hL to achieve a minimum of 2.5 - 5 million cells/mL


if that information is correct, then we are looking at

log(200 / 2.5) / log(2) = 6.32 replication periods

log(200 / 5) / log(2)  = 5.32 replication periods


That difference in pitching rate does not result in reduction in time to the start of active fermentation by a factor of two.  We are talking about an actual extension of approximately 90 minutes between these two pitching rates, not 18 hours.  The reduction has to be due to your process.  You mentioned that you measure out your yeast.  Are you purchasing BRY-97 in bulk?  Do you aerate your wort?  If so, to what extent?  The addition of Fermax could help, but not be a factor of two.

I bought a 500g brick of a Bry-97 that I keep vacuum sealed in the fridge. On brewday I measure out whatever the mfr recommends for the volume and specific gravity of the wort. My routine beers call for around 14 grams.

The only aeration I am using is provided by the action of the wort transferring into the fermenter (not much). I have always operated under the assumption that dry yeast does not require aeration.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[denny]

BRY-97 data point...yesterday at 2 PM I pitched one pack, not rehydrated, into 5.5 gal. of 1.067 wort at 65F.  No aeration was done other than pumping the wort to a bucket fermenter.  This morning at 10 AM I had positive pressure in the airlock and flecks of bubbles starting to form on the wort. So 20 hours from pitching to seeing signs of beginning fermentation 

[BrewBama]

Not bad for pitching 63% of the mfr’s recommendation really.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[denny]

Not bad for pitching 63% of the mfr’s recommendation really.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think I've made my experiences with manufacturer recommendations known many times.

[BrewBama]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[denny]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I knew you'd like that!  And just to be clear for other people, it's not that I ignore the recommendations completely.  I try it their way, then I try it my way before I decide.