After starting to use liquid yeast from early on, I’ve always just assumed it’s better. Based on some current research I did I want to verify some “facts” below. Thoughts?
Dry Yeast
-Higher Cell Count
-Longer Shelf Life
-Cheaper
-Less Variety
Liquid Yeast
-Lower Cell Count
-Shorter Shelf Life
-Pricier
-More Variety
Seems to me that it’s pretty cut and dried. I use dry for 90+% of my brews, but there are many types of yeast that just aren’t available–yet–in dry form. Examples are kolsch, biere de garde, and all Belgian styles, except for saison. There are others, but those are the wet ones that I can’t substitute with dry. Really, I wish I could use all dry yeast all the time, but until they can make those few, I guess I’ll have to go liquid once in a while.
Isn’t Danstar Abbaye Ale yeast supposed to be for abbey ale like dubbels and trippels?
Disclosure: I haven’t used abbaye ale yeast and make no claims as to how well they ferment.
I use US-05 as my house yeast for most ales, and W34/70 for all my lagers, but I still haven’t found a good dry for hefe, wit, Belgian etc. I’ve tried WB-06 for hefe and it’s just lacking, and T-58 isn’t so good either.
T58 works great for my wit but maybe it is just my palate. It’s the only style that seems to work for that yeast in my opinion.
To the op, I use dry yeast for 90% of my brews but mainly because I do a lot of American styles or lagers. Fermentis was supposed to announce two yeast strains available in 11.5 g at nhc which I am excited about. K97 German ale and s189 lager.
I’m really excited about this, especially the K97. I’d definitely work up a house altbier recipe if I could keep a couple of packs of German ale yeast in the fridge at all times.
US-05 (as well as 1056 and 001) works just about as well for an alt as anything else.
I agree. I have been waiting for them to make this available for some time. My current alt is not an alt because I use kolsch yeast. Tastes right to me but apparently it is not right…
When you review the character of Alt, yeast character is not really a part of it. Its typically a clean, malt focused style with assertive bittering. In the past, I have been using less attenuative strains for my Alts, but I think that Denny could be correct that US-05 would be an acceptable substitute. I suppose the way to keep attenuation down with this typically well-attenuating yeast would be to mash at higher temps to reduce fermentability.
Sounds like an upcoming test for me.
Good to know. That would be a simple fix for me since I use US05 regularly.
I’ve made pretty decent alts with 05. I’ve won ribbons for alts with 1056.
Good to know about T-58 and wit. I used it in a Belgian Blonde and it underattenuated horribly (although that was an extract batch so who knows what else went wrong there!)
I can’t recall seeing any evidence that suggests dry yeast is inferior to liquid yeast. I’ve made beer with both without any problems. I buy 05 over the liquid versions due to cost. I reuse the slurry and it’s no different from the dry version in my experience. However, I find for expressive yeast the dry versions are lacking in flavor development. There are far better strains available in liquid format. I don’t think that has anything to do with the moisture content just the strains selected for sale (although maybe strain selection was made for viability as dry yeast).
I like dry yeast because spontaneity is possible. Otherwise the selection is better w/liquid strains- as aforementioned^^^.
Buuuut… and I think Denny touches on this, or as I read into it (and know): the brewer and their skill makes the real difference in this issue just as much as the yeast plays their role.
The classic reason that liquid is seen as better was that when homebrewing was just starting up again in the 70s, the dry yeasts available at the time weren’t as pure of a culture. That reasoning isn’t really true anymore, so basically the only reason for liquid over dry now is whether you can find the strain that goes with the style you’re brewing.
I used 05 quite a bit before I reached the conclusion that it’s not the same as 001/1056. For that matter, even 001 and 1056 don’t give me the same result. That’s not to say that any of them are bad. They just have subtle differences from one another. Use whichever gives you the results you like.
I agree. Having kids, I like to be able to brew on short (or no) notice and I’m good using 05 for American styles in a pinch. But as someone who brews a lot of Belgian styles, I’m still waiting on better dry Belgian options. Belle saison (allegedly 3711) works fairly well, but that’s it. The other dry Belgian strains leave something to be desired IMO. All things equal I still prefer liquid cultures, given the time to make a starter.
If Belle Saison is 3711 I’ll eat my hat! I love 3711, and it’s my preferred saison yeast. Belle Saison (BS? ;D) is one I don’t like at all. It’s been an absolute lemon bomb whenever I’ve used it, and I’ve seen that in beers other people in my club have made.
Back to the original topic, I teach classes for the LHBS, and I always get questions about dry vs liquid. The comments in this thread are almost verbatim what I tell people. It’s nice to have validation!
Yeah, I’m not totally convinced either. I’ve read a few references to BS (;D ) being 3711 but that doesn’t make it so. Belle is more lemony to me, too. Regardless, not loving the dry Belgian strains.
That may be true, but the fermentation character of 1007 is something that I really enjoy in my alts. I’ve heard that K97 is the dry equivalent.