So I recently posted this picture of a split batch tripel using wlp 500 and wlp 530. The recipe is a 1.083 OG all pilsner with 2.5 lbs of cane sugar for 6 gallons at the end of the boil. The wort was cooled to 64 pitched and each carboy was aerated with 1.5 liters of O2 for 90 seconds measured with a flow meter. Yeast starters were made side by side and production date of the yeast vials was within a week of each other. Fermentation started at about 13 hours and was vigourous - see the picture, both were jumping out of the fermenter. Fermented at 64 and slowly raised to 70 over the first few days.
So here is where we are right now - the WLP 500 is at 1.012 and and the WLP 530 is at 1.036 - neither is currently showing signs of active fermentation.
I have made this recipe with WLP 500 3 times in the past and have won awards with the beer, tastes great in the fermenter right now. This WLP 530 is a mystery to me, never used it for this recipe before. I am wondering if this could be a case of that yeast not playing well with the cane sugar addition in the boil - all those simple sugars up front got gobbled up and the yeast tired out before attacking the maltose. However the WLP 500 just blasted through it (which is consistent with my prior experience).
Now I want to go back and rebrew this beer but add the sugar at mid fermentation and see if the results change.
In the short term I am going to jack up the temp on the 530 to 74 degrees to see if it will get rolling again. If that doesn’t work I will rack the WLP 500 into a corny and create a starter out of the yeast cake to pitch back into the wlp 530 stalled fermentaion once super active.
Let us know the results after you re-brew. The last two times I’ve used WY3787 (wyeast equivalent of 530) they both ended up under-attenuated despite pitching enough yeast and ramping up the fermentation temps into the low 70s.
Actually redbeerman and I both made Quads. I used a WLP 530 yeast cake from a BPA and the quad started at 1.106 then finished at 1.030, whereas redbeerman made his Quad using WLP 500 starting at 1.103 and finishing at 1.010. We are going to blend the Quads together to get the best of both worlds.
Yes James…I have a Tripel in the primary with WLP 530 right now. I’ll let you know the finishing gravity when it’s done. I mashed at 147F and used 4 lbs of sugar in an 11 gallon batch. I pitched at 64F on Sunday. It’s still going as I type.
Wlp500 is my Belgian house strain. I use ot from everything fromy Belgian White ale to my dark Belgian specialty ales. It’s a work horse strain and is easy to bottom crop unlike a lot of other Belgian strains. I surprised it doesn’t getore love.
That said 530 is one of my favorite strains as well. No telling why it pooped out on you but I do not think it was the sugar. I would actually prefer to use 530 for many of my recipes but the 500 is more versitile and is used in one oft flag ship beers.
I’ve brewed five batches of my strong golden ale using 3787 all of which included about 20% sugar added at the beginning of the boil. Apparent attenuation on those batches ranged from 89 - 96%.
Edit - Actually four of those beers were with 3787 and one was with 530. The 530 was actually the 89%.
I’ve never had problems using 530 with cane sugar in the boil. My last tripel was ~20% cane sugar (percent extract), OG 1.078, and got down to 1.010 or so.
I did a split-batched dubbel with WL500 (Chimay) and WL530 (Westmalle) earlier this year.
I don’t recall any underattenuation issues with either strain, though I think the 500 did the job better and faster.
Judges consistently scored the 500 dubbel better than the 530 dubbel, and, while both are good, I agree that the 500 is better.
WL550 (Achouffe) also produces great dubbels. May want to try 500 and 550 next time.
My go to Belgian strains are WY3522 and WLP530. I have experienced good attenuation with the 530 but on my last Tripel an alcohol “sweetness” was very noticable and never totally disapated.
I use both 500 and 530 frequently, and I’m surprised at your results because I normally see slightly better attenuation with the 500. I consistently see attenuation in the 90+% range with both strains. If we assume all things were equal between your two recipes, I’ll throw out the possibility that temperature may have caused your issue. I posted something similar in another thread, but I’ll throw it out there again. Stan Hieronymus in his book “Brew Like a Monk” discusses a phenomemom experienced by Belgian brewers with these yeast strains in which the high fermentation temperature drops too suddenly and the yeast become dormant. I have seen this for myself. If you let the exothermic reaction of the yeast naturally drive up the temperature, the temperature can quickly drop once activity in the fermenter begins to slow causing the yeast to crash. Taking the temperature back up won’t wake up the yeast either. It’s a strange thing, but very real and could esily be the cause of your issue.
The fermenters were both in the same temp controlled box and so I am pretty comfortable that the temps were the same. Now it is possible that the wlp 500 liked my ramp up schedule better then the 530, but there was nothing dramatic going on here (two degrees a day from 64 to 70…
Based on others observations I am really at a loss here!
Here’s a thought but it seems impossible - The picture is posted that shows the blow off - it was insane. My blow off bucket was full of yeast. Is it possible to blow off so much yeast that there isn’t enogh to fully ferment the beer.
Seems ridiculous to even say because there should still be tons and tons of yeast in suspension at that stage of fermentation - just running low on ideas on this one.
I’ve made two tripels with WLP530. First one went from 1.084 to 1.012 with 2lbs of belgian candi sugar. Second time I used cane sugar, and went from 1.090 to 1.020.
What I see conspicuously missing from this thread is the discussion of mash temperatures. They will greatly affect the attenuation of either of these yeasts. I mashed my quad at 152 for 2 hours. Bluesman mashed his at 155.
While it is true that the mash temp does have an effect on the amount of fermentable sugars and the resultant FG (and apparent attenuation %), the OP is performing a split batch (same wort, regardless of mash temp) with two different yeast strains fermented in the same environment (temp controlled, slow ramp upwards, etc.). The independent variables are the yeast strains (500 vs 530), the significant variance in the dependent variable (the SG, or FG) between the two strains while using the same wort and fermentation conditions is the mystery. One would assume that since the WL500 was able to ferment down to 1.012, then, since it was pitched into the exact same wort and fermented under the exact same conditions, why didn’t the WL530 strain, as well. The mash temp shouldn’t affect this variance we’re observing. Any effect the mash temp of the wort has on the FG of the beer should be realized with both yeast strains, i.e., T=147F might yield FG around 1.009 while T=156F might yield FG around 1.020 for both yeast strains unless there’s a significant difference in apparent attenuation bteween the two strains.
richardt hit all the main points but for what it’s worth the mash temp was single infusion 149 for 60 minutes with a 10 minute mash out at 168.
It is true that this was a 10 gallon batch split down the middle and I have a good set up for keeping all of the variables in check. I would add that in addion to the strain of yeast, there is another variable that was out of my control and that was treatment of the vials before I purchased them. As I said the production dates were within a week of each other and purchased from the same store so my assumption is that they came from white labs in the same delivery, but it’s possible that the 530 may have been misstreated.
I made two starters both on stir plates simultaneous so there should not be a significant difference in the estimated pitching rate - but since I can’t do cell counts (yet ;)) I can’t be sure what the actual cells/ml was.
Since others are reporting that they have had no problem with 530 when adding sugar to the boil I am starting to lean towards the yeast itself.
James, by split down the middle, do you mean that you ran off the first half of the wort into a fermenter and then ran off the last half into a second fermenter? Did you happen to measure the actual gravity in each fermenter?
I find that wort tends to stratify in the kettle. I’ve noted that if I collect a gravity sample immediately after whirlpooling, the gravity is higher than if I wait a few minutes. I assume that the sugars in the wort tend to settle, which leaves the more watery wort at the top of the kettle. Since I use a refractometer and collect my sample with a dropper, I can’t reach down into the wort very far. Has anyone else observed this?
If this separation were to occur, then its possible that the worts you started with in these two fermenters were not as identical as assumed. It would be the first-filled fermenter that would have the higher gravity wort. Is it possible that this fermenter was the 530 recipient?
