I have been using Wyeast 1968 for my go to AIPA for quite a while, wanting the fruity esters. Now I’m wanting to experiment. I’m curious which you prefer (Fruity Esters or Clean & Crisp).
I go clean and crisp myself and let the hops do the talking. I usually mash around 148-149 on IPA to ensure a dry ferment.
+1 For the couple of APAs that I 've brewed so far anyway. When I think of esters in a Pale Ale, I think English Style.
+2. Clean yeast character for AIPA. 149-150F for AIPA, 148F for IIPA for me.
My AIPA’s are all about the hops. The yeast is solely there to convert the malt sugars to alcohol.
I use 1968 in hoppy beers all the time, but they’re typically ESB’s.
Clean for American styles.
I prefer clean for APA/AIPA.
If you want fruity and crisp (as opposed to clean and crisp), there is the option to pair a modest amount of simple sugar with an English yeast. I actually do this for some English styles, so they end a bit drier. I usually aim for 10-15% simple sugar.
I checked fruity, but really I just like fruitier than super-clean in my APA/IPA.
My personal favorite yeasts for APA are the fruitier American yeasts (1272, 1332) and the cleaner British yeasts (1028, WLP007) I think the subtle ester profile of those yeasts provide a nice backbone for the hops, along with a clean malt bill. Sometimes I think the super clean yeasts end up too clean without some light complexity under the hops.
I would normally jump at “clean and crisp”, but most of my favorite commercial IPAs are brewed with an estery yeast:
FW Union Jack/Double Jack (IMO esters are very noticeable in the Double)
Stone IPA (although they suppress esters w/ temp, pitch rate, etc)
Schlafly AIPA/TIPA (I think their house yeast is an English-style yeast)
I like using 1968 in my American-style beers just because it drops like a rock. I can dial in esters with fermentation control and attenuation w/ grist bill (sugar).
I did a few batches with 1968 a few months back and didn’t find it estery at all. Maybe because I ran it in the low 60s?
+1. I’m just not a fan of hop teas.
Possibly, especially if you pitched a large amount of yeast. I usually ferment 1968 around 64-65F and overpitch about 20%. I get a mild fruitiness.
That wouldn’t surprise me. I have been targeting 68* for my IPAs with 1968. Do you remember any Esteriness (a new word?) when you tasted my IPA? I think I pick up an English character to my IPAs but that could be my imagination.
To get esters out of WY1968, you have to underpitch. If you pitch a big starter and rouse the yeast often, it ferments pretty well with not much in the way of fruity esters (it does leave a bigger mouthfeel than Chico ale yeast, IMO). I use it a lot for APA/AIPA.
I like to brew a 1.040 - 1.050 British bitter using just a smack pack, no starter, to get the esters, then use the yeast cake for a 1.050-1.060 APA or a 1.065-1.075 AIPA.
Siebel Bry 97 (a.k.a. Ballantine “Ale Brewery” Strain, Anchor, Wyeast 1272, White Labs WLP051, and Lallemand Bry 97) has become my favorite non-British/non-European ale strain. Brewtek CL-50 (a.k.a. Wyeast 1450) is a very close second (it’s probably the best strain for American red/amber ales on the planet). Siebel Bry 96 (a.k.a. Ballantine “Beer Brewery” Strain, “Chico,” Wyeast 1056, White Labs WLP001, Fermentis Safale US-05, …) has become my least favorite ale strain.
^ Preach it!
Agreed. I think there does need to be some malt characteristics in there too.
Agree about Bry 97…it’s a great yeast and does quite well in a wide variety of ale styles. It’s worth noting however that it’s probably not entirely accurate to characterize it as a ‘non British’ strain. While a number of American breweries have used it (and continue to use it) it’s origins actually do lead back to the UK; Some research has suggested that it may have been brought over to the USA by Ballantine for all of their ales when the brewery re-booted after Prohibition.
(Ballantine’s post-Prohibition brewmaster was a Scotsman).
If we are talking origins than all yeast is likely Pangean…
If you look at the top APA’s there are just as many using neutral yeast such as WLP001 as are using british like WLP002/WLP007.
I think both can be used to great effect in an American Pale Ale. Like many homebrewers I started brewing beers with WLP001/US-05; now, after a few years, I’ve gravitated to WLP002 more and more.
Yeast is actually quite new, by fungal standards. It evolved alongside the first flowering plants ~200 Mya.