Any ideas on the typical attenuation range for S23? I’ve got a Schwarzbier I brought in fora diacetyl rest, it quit after a week @1.019 (started 1.064). On their website they just 82%, but do people usually achieve that?
My notes indicate about 70% apparent attenuation on average. Of course that is an average so it could be like 66-74%, somewhere in that range, for any particular batch based on recipe and conditions. As such, if you are at 1.019, I will bet fermentation is complete. I’ve never heard 82% from real life experience, that seems bogus, regardless of what the manufacturer might specify, unless perhaps you were to use an enormous amount of adjunct or mash overnight or something unusual like that.
You might find this useful, it is the summation of hundreds of hours research and experience on the part of myself and others:
Cheers.
I’ve only used it twice -so far - 82% on a 1.058 premium lager and 78% on a 1.056 Schwartzbier. So 82% isn’t impossible.
It depends a lot on the wort. What ingredients and how it was mashed.
Holy heck. Thanks for the data. I might need to take a new deeper look into recent experiences as reported online. I’ve not used this yeast recently.
I was using 9 lb Munich 10L, 2 lb Pale, and 8 oz. Chocolate rye. Mashed at 154F for an hour, temp had dropped down to 148 by the end (Garage is a little cold this time of year). Is it possible I didn’t mash long enough? I haven’t brewed with this much Munich malt before.
You’re looking at about 73%, which isn’t awful. Is it possible that munich 10 isn’t quite as fermentable as other base grains?
I use Munich as a specialty malt based on an old BYO article: “Munich has far lower enzyme levels because of the additional heat used during the malting process. If Munich malt gets around the 10 °L level, it doesn’t have enough enzymes to serve as a base malt. You start finding diastatic power around the 45–55 level and an alpha amalyse level around 20–35. Lighter Munich malt can be used to a greater percentage because there’s enough diastatic power to compensate for less base malt. Dark Munich, however, is so limited in diastatic power as to relegate it to the category of a specialty malt.”
For a dunkel, I will mash longer to assure full conversion of Munich malts and use some Pilsner malt to help out.
I got 74% attenuation with S-23 for an Oktoberfest that was 67% Munich and 33% Pilsner Malt. Made a nice tasty beer. I’ll use S-23 again for Oktoberfest.
Keep in mind that the ttenuation listed by a yeast company is simply a way of comparing one yeast to another and does not necessarikky reflect the attenuation you may get. IMO, that’s much more dependent on wort than yeast.
Surgork’s genetic comparison chart pegs Fermentis S-23 and Wyeast WY2001 Pilsner Urquell as essentially twins. Wyeast lists WY2001 at 72% -76% apparent attenuation.
A bit off topic, but Surgork also reveals White Labs WLP-800 Pilsner Urquell to be an ale yeast.
Despite that, I find the results using S23 and WY2001 are nowhere near the sme. And keep in mi d what I said about attenuation listings.
Which do you find to attenuate more? Which leads you to the better “maltiness” characteristic?
Those are pretty much due to the wort, not the yeast.
On what do you base your conclusion? Do these two yeasts not produce a similar beer? S-23 & WY2001? Different worts would produce different beers, so perhaps this is not a valid comparison?
Curious as we might try the S-23 in a Czech Pils.
I have found S23 to be disgustingly fruity…so much so that I sent some to Palmer, who replied that the beer tested lime a passion fruit wine cooler. Even a year of lagering didnt fix it. But my comment was mainly in reference to attenuation.
I find that I can interpret Denny’s typos pretty well lately. “Tested lime” may mean “tasted like”.
;D. All these years and I still can’t type on a tablet!
Don’t worry, Denny. You ain’t alone! :D I have trouble with a laptop keyboard as well…