I found this pro brewing forum where they are discussing Fermentis yeasts. Interesting, I think.
That was pretty interesting. Particularly these statements:
“…I have used SO4 for years with no off tastes. And I dont oxygenate it at all. I will also highly recommend WB06 used at about 60% of recommended pitch levels and no oxygen. This stress on the yeast really brings out the phenols for a genuine German-style wheat. Great product.”
“I don’t use S-04, but I found oxygenating US-05 on the first pitch produced a tart fruit flavor, inconsistent with the beers I was trying to produce. Both major dry yeast manufacturers have mentioned there are enough lipids within the cell for the first fermentation (for average gravity worts). As soon as I stopped aerating the first pitch, I noticed far better flavor profiles for US-05.”
Theoretically you should not need to aerate with dry yeast. But I have done it both ways and never noticed any difference or tart flavors. And, personally, I do not like S04. And I hate WB-06.
The pro=brewer forum is a great resource for pro brewers and I have found lots and lots of information to technical questions I have. But, that being said, there are just as many bad pro brewers as there are bad homebrewers. And I have found a lot of opinions over there that I strongly disagree with. For instance, making a kolsch with the Chico strain.
Very interesting. I had not seen the probrewer forum until now. Looks like there is quite a mix over there.
You can’t beat the practicality of dried yeasts. Their easy to use and reasonably priced…how can a pro-brewer go wrong.
Perhaps that certain quality that can’t be achieved with a dry yeast but for the everyday beer, dry yeast are just fine.
Too true! Just because you’re selling your beer doesn’t automatically make you a great brewer. The pother thing to keep in mind is that things that apply to commercial brewers might not always apply to homebrewers.
I recently made an Am. Pale Ale with homegrown Cascades with 3 different splits. All of the splits were quite citrusy and the dry-hopped ones were extremely citrusy with sour notes. I was thinking that it was the homegrown Cascades in their second year that may been out of character or the gentle drying of the hops preserving more of the citrus character, but now I’m thinking it was aeration providing a sour note that accentuated the citrus.
Anyway, I’m not going to aerate my IPA with the homegrown Cascades.
I aerate ALL yeast. I don’t believe dry yeast should be treated any differently.
It doesn’t need it, but it doesn’t hurt.
Dry yeast already has its sterol reserves in tact before it undergoes its drying process - which is the same reason you should not make a starter with dry yeast. The only reason we aerate yeast is so the yeast can build its sterol reserves. With liquid yeast this is usually necessary, but with dry yeast is is not. So in that case dry yeast can be treated differently. And I like to suggest to new brewers who may not have proper aeration techniques to use dry yeast over liquid for this very reason. That said, like Denny said, I haven’t found that it hurts either way.
That’s interesting. I wonder why Fermentis, who only supplies dry yeast, recommends oxygenating the wort, as specified in their Tips and Tricks publication, page 7?
“Oxygen is required to assure a healthy cell multiplication. Oxygenation is
either made by top filling and splashing wort against the wall of the
fermenter, aeration or direct oxygen injection.”
The same question could be asked why white Labs or Wyeast suggests that their yeast is “pitchable” into a 1.060 wort, even though it is far, far below industry standards. Regardless, its not a bad idea to aerate with dry yeast, but I have tried it side by size and haven’t noticed a difference. I haven’t gotten the “tart flavors” as described in the probrewer thread when I have aerated and I haven;t noticed any unusual fermentation when I haven’t aerated. The truth of the matter is, if you aeration techniques are poor you will do much better using dry yeast because aeration is no where near as important with dry as opposed to liquid. There’s plenty of information out there, all you have to do is do a quick search.
And, if anyone thinks that splashing the wort against the sides of the fermenter is equal to proper aeration … well … that’s another story I guess. 
I’m sure you can make beer using dry yeast without aerating. There are lots of things you can or cannot do when brewing and still make beer, even good beer, but I think I’ll stick with the experts on this one, just to be sure.
Again, some experts claim that aeration is not necessary.
[quote]Q: I always aerate my wort when using liquid yeast. Do I need to aerate the wort before pitching dry yeast?
A: No, there is no need to aerate the wort but it does not harm the yeast either. During its aerobic production, dry yeast accumulates sufficient amounts of unsaturated fatty acids and sterols to produce enough biomass in the first stage of fermentation. The only reason to aerate the wort when using wet yeast is to provide the yeast with oxygen so that it can produce sterols and unsaturated fatty acids which are important parts of the cell membrane and therefore essential for biomass production.
If the slurry from dry yeast fermentation is re-pitched from one batch of beer to another, the wort has to be aerated as with any liquid yeast.
[/quote]
Okay, well one supplier says to do it, the other says it’s not necessary. Neither says it’s a bad thing. I like to make the best beer I can make, so I’ll take that tiny, extra step and stick with aeration. Logically, it makes more sense to me.
I agree 100% it doesn’t hurt. And I also admit that, given the choice, I normally choose to aerate too. just to be safe. That said, a few weeks ago I noticed my o2 tank was out and I was glad I was using dry yeast since I had to rely on the shake method.
Do you also proof the dry yeast with water or make a starter with it before adding it to your wort?
I’ve pitched 05 both with and without aeration and didn’t find any difference in performance of the quality of the beer. Being the “pragmatic” type, I hate to do work that doesn’t provide a noticeable benefit. I don’t bother doing anything about aeration with 05 now.
Yes, if needed.
I’ve used US05 with and without starters and quite honestly, the starters give it a boost just like they do liquid yeasts. Much faster starts then pitching dry. I don’t do it very often, but the beer certainly doesn’t suffer when I do. A couple of weeks ago, I pitched 2 packets (dry), in 10 gallons of wort and it took about 48 hours to get going. Had I made a starter, it would have easily cut that time in half.
As easy, convenient and clean as US-05 is making a starter defeats the purpose of using it. If I am going to make a starter I will use liquid yeast. I think the liquid chico strain is a little better than US-05 anyways. And I feel much more comfortable repitching the slurry for several gens. If you are having a lag over 24 hours with US-05 though you probably are using unhealthy/expired yeast anyways and maybe you should be starting it. Its rare I have a lag on US-05 longer than 24 hours, even pitching in the mid 50s.
Another thing along the same lines as aeration for dry yeast - interestingly enough you don’t really need to aerate the wort at all. What needs aeration is the yeast. A lot of belgian brewers do not aerate the wort, but only aerate the yeast. Same principal applies as with dry yeast. The point of the matter is to get the yeast to stock up their sterol reserves so they can bud and reproduce easier. You do this by constantly aerating them during the reproductive cycle. So if you grow a starter under constant aeration, and pitch it immediately without letting it go dormant, technically you should not need to aerate the wort. Though, again, it probably doesn’t hurt.
Also, anytime you repitching yeast after a fermentation (not under constant aeration) you need to aerate either the yeast or the wort because as soon as the yeasts’ metabolism goes anaerobic they use up those sterol stores.