I tried a few ale styles with 34/70 fermented in the 60s. They turned out ok but I felt like they were too thin and lacked anything dynamic. Overall more bland than brewing with chico.
Thanks for providing the link. Looks like no edits since the original posting. Just about the only reasonably reliable chart of its kind we’ve got at this point.
Sulphur is sign of stress. Low fermentation temperature is a stress factor. If you pitch at Ale pitching rate and ferment at Ale fermentation schedule, that will go away.
There’s a VERY long discussion on this at HBT. “They” (the folks in that thread) say that the sulfur is missing in warm fermented lagers with the 34/70 strains. So much so that “they” are complaining because it isn’t there and “they” expect it to a point in a German Lager.
BTW, another chief complaint “they” have is the difficulty to get the 34/70 series strains to clear. For that reason some of “them” moved to the California Lager strains. I am about to brew a few to see how it works out.
Since 830 is reported to be a 34/70 strain (based on Dave’s document linked above) you should be OK to ferment warm or cold with it (based on that post in HBT). S-189, 34/70, and California Lager strains all have a wide temp range listed on their packaging and those yeast strains reportedly (based on that thread) do well warm.
However, I believe the esters often associated with Ales may be missing with those strains.
Esters are developed in yeast grow phase of fermentation. You adjust ester production with fermentation temperature and pitching rate. Higher initial fermentation temperature will give you more esters.
So the low ester production observed with Lager yeast strain = not enough yeast growth in the beginning of the fermentation.
Nothing magical about that. You want more esters, create more esters. You want less esters, create less esters.
Right on, Leos. I’m one of the people who don’t want much in the way of esters. I start with a low ester strain yeast, thenj treat it in a manner, that produces as few esters as possible.
Since I’ve been doing warm, pressurized lager fermentation, I’ve had everything I thought I knew about sulfur and esters thrown into doubt. Growth is strong early on at high temperatures, yet the application of top pressure even late in fermentation (apparently this is what does it) suppresses ester formation somehow. I never detect any sulfur in the ferm chamber at these warmer (ale-like) temperatures (though these fermentations proceed so rapidly maybe I’m missing it.)
Take into account everything all those “theys” on the HBT warm lager thread BrewBama referenced are reporting and…
I am beginning to suspect something very radical (in light of all the study and discussion that’s ever been devoted to fermentation procedures) about ester production, and sulfur as well:
Yeast strain is far more important than how it’s treated. Pick the right yeast and it will pretty much do its thing no matter what you do to it (within reason.)
FWLIW I recently did a couple split ferment batches with M-54 Cal common and 05, in both beers the M54 finished faster but a couple points higher than the 05, IIRC in one batch the M54 was finished, crashed and bottled before the 05 had finished eating. In both cases the 05 beer was far and away the better tasting of the 2, so much so that I’ll probably do my house common with 05 in the future. Yesterdays batch I’m splitting between 34/70 at lager temps and 05 at ale temps. I boiled each separately with different hops so the only thing I may find out from the “exberiment” is the difference in attenuation.
I’ve always read what you are saying but that’s not what “they” are finding as far as I can tell by simply reading through “their” experiences. “They” are fermenting higher than I dare and NOT getting esters …unless I am misinterpreting.
That’s what I’m getting at too. We can no doubt manipulate things a little. But that’s a minor adjustment, while the bulk of the outcome is determined by the yeast’s hardwired tendencies. Like so many things we do, ingredients are far more determinative than subtleties of process. And the little adjustments are probably both more controllable and more crucial at the commercial level. Don’t get me wrong, I’m gonna remain anal and keep geeking out over the details. But Denny and those warm lager guys and all those taking simple approaches to everything might be more securely in possession of all their marbles.
BTW, another chief complaint “they” have is the difficulty to get the 34/70 series strains to clear. For that reason some of “them” moved to the California Lager strains. I am about to brew a few to see how it works out.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
[/quote]
I can see that being an issue as I’ve found WLP830 to be pretty slow in clearing. But a couple of weeks in the low 30’s seems to take care of that.
I’ve used M54 quite extensively and 2112 a few times, I’ve yet to have either of them clear up all that well. Just sayin’. I haven’t yet split a batch between Cal Lager and 34/70 or M76, sounds like something that needs to go on my short list.
Forgive me for asking, but using a lager yeast would make your beer a lager, not an ale, right?
How about this…just use Wyeast 1056. It is clean and versatile. 1056 will ferment at both cool temps and warm temps. A local brewery used it to ferment their “lager” style beers, using cool temps. The temp is from 60F to 72F. And I think it will work at even more extreme temps.
Or, use the Wyeast 2112, California Common strain. It does well at warmer temps, 58 - 68F.
With regards to the above comments on W-34/70, we will keg some very soon, and a full report will be posted. Based on my small sample taste test, we have a winner!
Depends who you ask. Some will differentiate by species, some by manufacturer name, and some by process.
Personally I say it’s only a “lager” if it uses pastorianus (species), and preferably at relatively cool temperatures as well (process), and I couldn’t care less about whether the manufacturer considers it a “lager” or an “ale” yeast (name).
But I’m sure many people would disagree with me, and that’s fine. The terms mean different things to different people. This is not far from the debate over “stout” vs. “porter”. Personally I think the two “styles” have evolved to be one and the same. But many would beg to differ. And again I don’t care.
