Hi, i’m trying to get into the wonderful world of homebrewing. I’ve been looking for all the ingredients necesarry for my first batch, i will be a “Big Basin Amber Ale”. Thing is, the recipe requires Wyeast 1332 Northwest Ale, and since i’m in México, there’s no way I can get said strain. Can anyone help me choose an alternative yeast? And since this is going to happen often, is there some advice for swapping yeast strains in a recipe.
P.D: I’ve found some Fermentis and LALLEMAND mostly; as well as a new, mexican, liquid yeast company.
Here’s a comparison chart that I refer to often. According to this there is not another company that produces a version of this strain, but I use this strain myself and it’s very clean, so I’d recommend another clean American Ale yeast such as Wyeast 1056, which is also Safeale US-05 or Lallmand BRY-97 (dry yeasts).
WLP041 is believed to be identical to 1332. If you can’t find that one, WLP007 will get you very close. If you must use a dried yeast, S-04 will suffice, but it won’t be quite the same, it won’t attenuate as much and you’ll want to substitute simple sugar such as cane sugar for 10-15% of the base malt to get the attenuation down.
I suppose it’s high time I shared this secret list with the AHA forum. This is based on about 100 hours of research by me, but with primary credit to many others, including results of recent genomic studies conducted over the past 3 years. This is a snapshot copy, I’m still working to figure out how to maintain a link to an active “living” copy that I can update every couple months. Enjoy:
EDIT: From work, I could not get the above link to work. But this one works, so maybe this will work better for others, too:
Dave, if I may, a bit OT: You have been busy! I’m having trouble viewing this, but… I see you have two question marks for S-04, the two closest on suregork’s dendrograph. I’d suggest that WLP013 can be ruled out phenotypically, but WLP006 is still close. But I’d bet it’s neither of those. If we’ve learned anything it’s that even if two strains start from the same source, they go their own ways in the hands of different labs. Especially as Fermentis have surely selected adapted isolates for their specific purposes. Borne out by the fact that it has its own place on the tree. If functional equivalents are what we want…
To the OP: Dont worry about using the exact yeast strain a recipe’s creator did. Any yeast that will provide an appropriate degree of attenuation, flavor, etc. can substituted according to your needs. Read the manufacturer’s descriptions. Most important is to choose from yeasts you know you can obtain fresh and in good condition.
I don’t think US 05 = BRY 97. Though BRY 97 is a clean flocculant yeast, I believe BRY 96 = US 05. Beware — BRY 97 has a significant lag period. …but I guess Dave’s spreadsheet makes that fairly clear.
None of the above are equivalent. BRY-97 isn’t remotely related to anything else. US-05 is closely related to BRY-96 (“Chico”), but at about 83% is almost 10% more attenuative than Chico. No way I would consider any of these to be equivalents. Similar in clean American ale flavors, sure. But not much else.
That chart predates all the genomic studies. So does Kristen England’s for that matter. As of this date, the most reliable chart of “equivalents” is Dave’s. But I would still add the caveat that divergence is ongoing, and as such source is almost irrelevant. Each commercial strain must be evaluated on its own in practice.
Precisely why I finally, finally, took the time to “fix” it all. I just got sick & tired of all the old outdated misinformation. Plus I needed to gather all my thoughts on all the dried yeasts.
Yeah, for instance S-04 clearly is unrelated to Whitbread B. The provenance of strains was really not known but presumed in the best of cases, it seems. A lot of misplaced faith was involved on the part of manufacturers, and quite possibly intentional misdirection. Now we’re getting unbiased testimony from the yeast itself.