[gmac]

I recently asked about WLP002 and got some great advice but I'm not sure that this is the strain for me yet.  I've made 4 batches of different English style beers with it (and a pumpkin) and I do find it slightly too sweet.  I'm wondering what you think of WLP007 and WLP028?  I am also open to suggestions for Wyeast products but I'm referring to White Labs because that is what I'm using today.
The beers I've made have been good but not as attenuated as I'd like.  I guess I'm looking for some suggestions for new or different yeasts to try.  I use WLP001 for most of my pale ales, IPAs and wheat beers but I want to find another couple strains that diversify the flavour profile of the beers I make (not all just Chico yeast for every beer).
Thanks

[denny]

Have you used WY1272?

[narcout]

I'm wondering what you think of WLP007 and WLP028?

I love WLP007 for American IPAs (think Stone IPA or Ruination).

[The Professor]

Are you brewing from extract or grain?  If from grain, what temps are you mashing at, and are you using lots of crystal malt?
I only ask because the WL002 (or WY1968) is one of the four main strains I use regularly, and haven't had 002 beers turn out sweet unless designed to be so.  It actually is capable of making a smashingly dry & hoppy IPA.
And conversely, I've made some surprisingly full bodied and sweeter beers (such as Burton/Old Ale) with the so called "Chico" strain and it's various aliases (even with the high attenuating 05 dry version).

While it's true that different strains can produce quite different results, after experimenting around for quite a few years I've found that they can be coaxed into producing similar results to each other with minor tweaks to recipe and procedure. 

It's great to experiment with various strains and different brewers have different aims in doing so. 
In my case, in an effort to consistently make the beers I enjoy, I zeroed in on just a couple of strains to use other than my preferred house yeast.   
After experimenting with a known favorite recipe to get to know how the alternate yeasts performed, I found that a little manipulation of the brew routine could yield remarkably similar (and sometimes even identical) results regardless of which yeast I opted to use. 
Doing so allows me to sub out the house yeast if I need to brew and don't have a pitchable crop ready to go, and I can still get a predictable result.
Experiment!   That's half the fun of this hobby in the first place.

[gmac]

"Are you brewing from extract or grain?  If from grain, what temps are you mashing at, and are you using lots of crystal malt?"

All grain.  Usually mashing around 152 although I could be a bit higher.  I know mashing lower would reduce unfermentables and sweetness.  I really need a better thermometer because I often think I've got the temp stable at 150 and then I check it when I pull it out and it has crept up.  Either I've discovered how to circumvent the laws of Thermodynamics or my thermometer is too slow stabilizing at temp.  I don't think I use too much crystal as far as I know.  Probably about 1/2 lb in 5 gals.  Almost always C45.

I haven't used WY1272 either.  Looking at the description, is it much different from WLP001?  I just see all the "American" styles so I wasn't sure what character it would add. 

How about the Scottish strain?  Anyone try that?  I don't have the room or carboys to do a real split batch unless I plan way ahead.

[The Professor]

Definitely check calibration on your thermometer.  I had an issue with that some years ago and realized that the dial thermometer I had been using was out of whack by almost 4°F...definitely enough to make a difference.  I only figured it out when I got suspicious and stuck a borrowed lab thermometer into my mash along with the dial thermometer, and discovered the discrepancy.
As a result, I managed to calibrate the dial unit...but now use a better lab thermometer in the mash to be sure.

Also, whatever kind of thermometer you use, take readings in various areas of the mash.  
You'll probably be fairly surprised at the variation you'll likely see due to hot spots.  That represents another area where experimentation is in order so you can "dial in" the parameters specific to your particular setup and procedures.  

The setup I've used for 20+ years is rather basic compared to what some homebrewers use, and I do still get the inevitable hotspots in my mash (despite stirring it), but once I figured out what to expect from my strike water temps and the resulting mash temps I got in my readings, it has been smooth sailing and results have become quite predictable.

[denny]

I haven't used WY1272 either.  Looking at the description, is it much different from WLP001?  I just see all the "American" styles so I wasn't sure what character it would add. 

How about the Scottish strain?  Anyone try that?  I don't have the room or carboys to do a real split batch unless I plan way ahead.

1272 is kinda nutty and just a tiny bit fruity IMO.  Pretty different from 1056/001.


1728 (Scottish ale) is a pretty clean strain that isn't a lot different from 1056/001.