not styles I typically brew but for English styles I have enjoyed London ale III.
while not a liquid yeast I also really like belle saison. it’s not quite as “saisony” as some may like but for me it’s just the right amount of character.
For saison, I have liked both 3724 and Belle Saison. I also have a blended mix of 3724 & 3711 carbing right now and the samples were great. As for the rest of those styles, I really don’t have any experience with brewing them
so in an effort to offer much of anything here are some of my favs in general.
ale:
I like wyeast 1450 (denny’s fav 50) for a lot of things.
Obviously 1056 is a solid choice.
American Ale II (1272) is nice although I’ve only used it once.
London Ale III (1318)
I have liked Scottish Ale (1728) the times I have used it. Even in something like a hoppy summer beer.
lager:
2124 is a solid all around yeast
2032 is one I have used a bunch of times and really enjoy for a malty lager
I also used a staro-prague once (seasonal) which was really great.
WL833 is a nice yeast if you like ayinger beers.
Yes, not allowing a smack pack to swell is throwing away its strength. When used properly, pitching yeast from a smack pack is like pitching a first-level starter at high krausen.
how do you account for those times when the pack takes more or less time to swell up? do you just smack it a little early and then stick it in the fridge when it swells earlier than you needed it?
I’ve used 1098 vs 007 side by side. Wyeast can’t hold a candle to WLP007. It’s not even close. Almost 10 points in difference in attenuation in favor of White Labs. I also feel WLP001>WY1056. But, it’s all beer, brewing, and a matter of personal preference and taste.
I must be something terribly wrong here. Last couple of times I tried to smack a pack, the pack either burst open or the nutrient packet was not broken
Wow, I don’t know. I make an Arrogant Bastard-ish beer using 1098 and it eats sugars like crazy in that grist. I came out slightly lower than intended the last couple times.
EDIT - I’ve never used 007, so I can’t compare. Just saying that I get pretty high attenuation (1.070 to 1.010 in that recipe) with 1098.
Are you saying that there’s significant cell replication as it swells? Either I’m misunderstanding or you’re at odds with what Wyeast says.
From Greg Doss in response to a question I emailed him in 2005…
Thanks for the email. I’m sorry to say that very little cell growth is
occurring in an activated package of yeast. Typically there is about a
10% increase in cell density. In any fermentation, yeast growth is
controlled by the depletion of a limiting nutrient. In the Wyeast smack
pack, sugar is the limiting factor. There is not enough sugar available
to provide the yeast enough energy to support a large amount of growth.
However, the nutrients that are introduced to the yeast are used for
cell membrane synthesis and nutrient uptake starting the culture’s
metabolism. By starting the culture’s metabolism before pitching, the
brewer can greatly reduce lag times. The CO2 which causes the swelling
is a by-product of this small amount of metabolism.
I hope that this helps. If you have further questions, please ask.