Author Topic: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?  (Read 456 times)

Offline bboy9000

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • KCMO
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2015, 10:17:26 PM »
Thanks Tommy.  I noticed the same layer and yeast ring on the side about 12 hours after pitching.  I didn't want to shake it as I've read not to aerate dry yeast.  I just gave the carboy a swirl so maybe I'll see some evidence of fermentation tomorrow.
Brian
mobrewer

Offline S. cerevisiae

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1151
  • deus ex machina
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #16 on: February 25, 2015, 07:54:06 AM »
Thanks Tommy.  I noticed the same layer and yeast ring on the side about 12 hours after pitching.  I didn't want to shake it as I've read not to aerate dry yeast.  I just gave the carboy a swirl so maybe I'll see some evidence of fermentation tomorrow.

While aeration is not critical on the first pitch with dry yeast, moderate aeration will not hurt a fermentation.

Offline S. cerevisiae

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1151
  • deus ex machina
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2015, 08:02:50 AM »
I thought the liquid equivalent was WLP051/WY1272?

It's been a long time since I've used WLP051, but I don't remember it being an especially slow starter.

WLP051/Wy1272 are the liquid forms of BRY 97.  The liquid forms of BRY 97 are slightly slower than the average liquid strain, but not nearly as slow as dry BRY 97.    My SWAG is that BRY 97 does not handle aerobic propagation and fluid bed drying as well as BRY 96.  The shelf life also appears to be shorter than that of dry BRY 96 (a.k.a. US-05), which is not helped by the fact that BRY 97 appears to be a slow seller.  Dry BRY 97 does behave normally upon repitching, which leads me to believe that dry BRY 97 could benefit from being started instead of just rehydrated.

Offline 3bbrewing

  • Retailers
  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • San Diego, CA
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #18 on: February 25, 2015, 09:07:40 AM »
Good info Mark!  Thank you...  I've done starters with dry yeast in the past with the dry lager yeast, and I found it to work very well.  I see it as making a mini-beer. 

Not that it's uncommon, but I've found some packs that were 1 1/2 years old based on the use by date in various shops and/or have received via mail order.  I go with something else then or send it back. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anti-Cheers...cause if I hear one more habitual automatic pretentious CHEERS I'll summon the Kraken.

California   
[7036.3, 342.1] Apparent Rennerian

Offline bboy9000

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • KCMO
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #19 on: February 25, 2015, 07:02:43 PM »
Well after 90 hours and no fermentation I pitched some fresh Pacman that I grew up from 9 month old slurry last week.  I had active fermentation within 90 minutes.
Brian
mobrewer

Offline skyler

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
    • Brewing After Law School
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2015, 08:04:06 PM »
IME, BRY-97 is more temperature-sensitive (with regards to cold fermentation) than other strains of Chico (and the like). While I have fermented Pacman as low as 52F once (56F on several occasions) and US-05, WLP001, and WY1056 have all given me good results in the 58F-60F range, BRY-97 hasn't enjoyed temperatures below 64F for me. I still slightly prefer it over US-05 because it has been a little more flocculant for me and hasn't ever given me the peachy "dry yeast" flavor, I consider it a much more delicate yeast than the other similar strains.

Offline S. cerevisiae

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1151
  • deus ex machina
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2015, 09:26:41 PM »
IME, BRY-97 is more temperature-sensitive (with regards to cold fermentation) than other strains of Chico (and the like).

BRY 97 is not "Chico."  Chico is BRY 96.  The major modern brewery using BRY 97 is Anchor.  As I mentioned earlier, both strains came from Ballantine.   BRY 96 is kind of unique in the world of domesticated brewing yeast because it is a diploid yeast strain.  Most brewing yeast strains are polyploids.


Offline bboy9000

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • KCMO
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2015, 09:55:15 PM »

IME, BRY-97 is more temperature-sensitive (with regards to cold fermentation) than other strains of Chico (and the like).

BRY 97 is not "Chico."  Chico is BRY 96.  The major modern brewery using BRY 97 is Anchor.  As I mentioned earlier, both strains came from Ballantine.   BRY 96 is kind of unique in the world of domesticated brewing yeast because it is a diploid yeast strain.  Most brewing yeast strains are polyploids.
Since reading your posts I've noticed there's all kinds of misinformation on homebrewing forums on the identity of BRY-97.  Most homebrewers on the web think its Chico or Pacman. 

Anyway, it will be some other batch when I get to experience BRY-97 as I pitched Pacman after 94 hours of no fermentation.  The 9 month old Pacman was slow to start in the 2L starter.  I decanted the liquid portion of the starter into another vessel 48 hours after pitching 200mL of old slurry, (it was slow to wake up) leaving most of the settled stuff on the bottom.  I crashed the decanted liquid and ended up with about 200mL of fresh yeast.  I didn't think it would be enough but it started fermenting the wort in less than 90 minutes.  After 90 hours of no fermentation from the dry BRY-97 that was nice.
Brian
mobrewer

Offline YooperBrew

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Beer Geek
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2015, 08:46:56 AM »
Bry-97 is notoriously slow, but once it gets going - does very well to produce a fairly clean ferment. I have repitched out to about 4 generations - the lag shortens dramatically with a BRY-97 starter (harvested) at high krausen.

That's been my experience as well.  It starts very slowly for me, but I prefer the clean flavors over the other dry I used to use, S05.  It flocculates better than S05 as well, and makes a clearer beer faster in my experience.

I don't use it often, but when I have used it it's done just fine for me.
Vote for me for the AHA Governing Committee!
http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/membership/aha-governing-committee/election/lorena-evans-2/
AHA member since 2008

Offline S. cerevisiae

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1151
  • deus ex machina
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2015, 09:33:50 AM »
Since reading your posts I've noticed there's all kinds of misinformation on homebrewing forums on the identity of BRY-97.  Most homebrewers on the web think its Chico or Pacman. 

Lallemand owns the Siebel Institute of Technology.  If Lallemand wanted to release "Chico" in its native form, they would have just released BRY 96.  Instead, they chose to offer the other Ballantine strain as their clean American strain. 

About the only thing that BRY 97 and BRY 96 have in common is that both strains are relatively neutral.  BRY 97 is malt forward and highly-flocculent. Here's a photo that I shot of BRY 97 flocs after racking:




Offline coolman26

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2015, 06:39:06 PM »
I never mind the lag.  As long as you pitch the right amount, go with it. Ballantine, wish I could have tried one.

Offline bboy9000

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • KCMO
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2015, 06:41:23 PM »
Well after 90 hours I started to mind the lag.  I'll have to wait until next time and try the liquid version in a starter.
Brian
mobrewer

Offline coolman26

  • Assistant Brewer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2015, 06:50:00 PM »
Wow 90, I have been at 48.  I hardly ever use dry for this reason.  Starters just make sense for me.  Plus some strains are a PIA. 

Offline bboy9000

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • KCMO
    • View Profile
Re: Who Has Experienced BRY-97 Slow Start?
« Reply #28 on: March 04, 2015, 07:00:14 PM »
The irony is I was wanting to pitch Pacman from some 9 year old slurry but it didn't take off so I went to the LHBS and got the dry BRY-97.  Then the Pacman woke up a day after I pitched the two packs of dry yeast so a put it in the fridge not knowing I'd need it. 
Brian
mobrewer