Ok so I know there are detractors of dried yeasts here, but I have good luck with most of Fermentis products and use them a lot with very good results. I’m going to brew a stout that calls for using the WLP002 and wondered about the similarities if any between the two strains for these brands. How interchangeable might they be?
Anyone have first hand knowledge of what the S04 strain is and how it might work or be similar to the White Labs 002 strain? Both are English strains. Both suitable for similar English styles according to the descriptions.
Brewing Saturday and making a starter tomorrow if necessary with the liquid yeast unless somebody can confirm they are the same strain in which case I’ll just pickup some S04 and rock that.
No knowledge of 04, but I have done several batches w/ US-05. I’ve done the same recipe w/ 05, 1056, and 001 and really couldn’t tell any difference. Then again, I didn’t do a side by side comparison so I wouldn’t call my opinions scientific. I mainly stick w/ 05 now and just use liquid yeast for beers that really rely on the yeast for flavor (Hefe’s, Saisons and other Belgians). I do a milk stout and coconut milk stout both w/ 05 and they each turn out great. There is definitely a difference when the beer starts to get really active fermentation, with the dry yeast taking up to a day longer to get there.
Yeah S05 is Chico yeast - that’s pretty well known. It’s essentially same yeast as WLP001 or Wyeast 1056.
I’ve been using that regularly for years. Intimately familiar with it’s flavor and behavior.
As for S04 being the same strain as WLP002 - that I do not know and THAT is really my question.
Seems as though it’s highly likely. Both ferment quickly, have medium attenuation, and flocculate very well. Both are described as a widely used and/or popular English style Ale yeast. Both are recommended for same English beer styles, ESB, Milds, Bitters, Porters, Stouts etc.
I’ve brewed a few beers with S04 and WLP002 in the past and I recall being happy with the results but it’s been probably 6 years! Guess I’ve been in a bit if a rut with American ales for awhile.
I’m running to my LHBS today to pickup ingredients for my Obsidian stout clone. Unless somebody can convince me they are the same, I think I’m going to get both yeasts and brew another batch of something else with the S04 another day. I’ll make a starter with the WLP002 tonight so it’s ready to rock Saturday morning. The Obsidian is pretty healthy clocking in at around 1.070 according to my Beersmith. I followed Jamil’s podcast on formulating a clone and had some other information on a recipe from the web too. It was recommended by the brewer at Deschutes to overpitch a bit.
You know… I still think they are probably pretty similar considering their pedigree but this is good information with which to start.
Since I bought two packets and vials of both respectively, I’m debating mixing them!
I thought of rehydrateing the S04 and pitching it with one vial of WLP002.
I will investigate the Whitbread and Fullers info available on the interwebs and decide.
OK upon further review of multiple and various internet sources it would appear:
As was mentioned above by Joe, S-04 is considered a Whitbread strain
There are two Whitbread strains out there and one is considered “dry” as in higher attenuation
Since the description from Fermentis indicated medium attenuation, I’m leaning toward the not so dry strain
In either case it is not the same strain as WLP-002 which is the Fullers strain. Even if attenuation is similar, these yeasts have different flavor profiles
Seems as though S-04 is great for big, dark beers so it would definitely work for what I’m doing
So I’m going to pitch both vials of WLP-002 into a starter in my flask tonight and put them on the stir plate.
Rather than mix, I would recommend perhaps doing a split batch and fermenting one half with each strain so that you can compare the differences.
I used to use lots of Nottingham, but after doing a couple of split batches with WY1968 I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t like the flavor profile of Nottingham. Too fruity and tart for me.
You can really taste the differences if you ferment the same wort with different yeasts.
Wow…that’s a lot of detractors for a yeast strain! Mr Conn’s opinion along with the rest seals the deal for me. No offense to my other fellow brewers who gave their 2 cents by the way.
Nasty bready…guess I’ll just make some bread with it and forget about it.
You should really do a split batch and compare them for yourself. I’m a big fan of Denny, but I don’t agree with him on everything. Taste is subjective, and you might find S-04 to be the best yeast ever, for your taste. I happen to like S-04 a lot, especially for making cider. I made a special bitter with S-04 I thought was good, but nothing fantastic. More of my friends loved that beer than any of the other beers I’d made before.
+1 I’ve used S-04 a couple of times, and I thought it was good enough. I fermented quite cool with it, around 62F. I thought the fruity aspect came through a bit much for me, but it was still a very enjoyable beer.
Just as a practical matter, too, if you rehydrate the yeast between 105-109F you’ll get close to 90% viability for dry yeast. For every -10F drop in rehydration temp, you lose 10% viability. So for best results, don’t just sprinkle onto wort. (The instructions from Fermentis differ, but I’d ignore those). If you just sprinkle on wort, you’ll kill about half the dry yeast. Since there is about 230b cells in an 11.5g packet, losing half isn’t disastrous, but may be deleterious to your beer.
So you’re saying that viability of the yeast is related to the temperature of the water you rehydrate in? So if I rehydrate in 98F water I’m killing 10% more cells than if I do it in 108F degree water? I’m not sure I understand that. Where are you getting that from?
I always thought that the argument for rehydration was more related to the sugars from the wort rushing into the cells as opposed to the temperature.
IIRC Denny was the one who told me about that Q&A in the first place, though maybe not that exact link. My temp range from memory wasn’t exactly correct. I was thinking of the 105-109* range given by lallemand for their wine yeasts.
If you try rehydrating the yeast at different temps, you’ll notice the yeast becoming creamy and active much quicker at 105* than 85*, so there must be something going on there.
