i don’t believe in blind tasting for myself. i believe in multiple tastings over time with a truly open mind. i record it basically for myself (and occasionally for the edification of you people) and know that any deception would just get in the way of improving my beer.
I’m with Denny on this one. WY2206 all the way. I brew a lot of lagers, and 2206 is very versatile, from delicate pale lagers like Helles to big malty lagers like Doppelbock. Reliable attenuation, low diacetyl, and low levels of sulphur. 2124 always produces more sulphur in my experience.
I went to order 2206 at Northern Brewer and they were sold out. SO I went to LabelPeelers and they don’t carry Wyeast. I don’t like the WL820 (the supposed equivalent to 2206) very well having used it in the past so I stuck with WLP830 (which to me is nearly identical to WY2124 …) Oh well, maybe next order.
Oh boy is that ever outdated. WLP820 is more closely related to WLP029 Kolsch than it is to 2206.
Blame Jamil and Kristen England. 
I do. However they tried their best, given the complete lack of genomic information available at the time. 
Either 2042 danish lager or wlp835 German lager x. I don’t like 34/70, or most other strains. 2042 has been my favourite for many years, though recently I tried out wlp835, love it. I mostly brew rice lagers, I like dry, lighter bodied lagers.
I couldn’t find much in the way of tasting notes on these splits, just one that said “can’t put a finger on it”. Since my last comment I re-sampled a Marzen split with 34/70 & S-23 [~ 4months since bottling] and a Schwarzbier with 34/70 & S-189 [bottled last October]. Both batches are getting long in the tooth but still very drinkable, and in both cases it was difficult to detect much of a difference other than that the S-23 was over carbed, which always seems to happen with that yeast, and the 34/70 Marzen had a bit more & better perceived bitterness, and the 34/70 Schwarz a more substantial mouthfeel - even though the F.G. were identical.
My sense of taste isn’t as high functioning as it might be, too many years of liberal use of spices in my cooking. I frequently can’t tell you specifically why I like or dislike something, especially different beers, but the fact remains that I either do or don’t.
i wasnt as pleased with 34/70 as i was with s-189 over a total of 4 batches. its not great to say “cant put finger on it” but i sort of agree, it was just like an odd taste that wasnt a big deal in a 1.045 gravity lager, but became an issue in a 1.065 or so gravity bock i attempted. cant 100% pin it on the yeast, but as i said. s-189 was extremely tasty to me. i would say 34/70 has maltiness however.
I think it is interesting that so many people don’t care for 34/70. I wonder if it is because it throws diacetyl and needs to be handled carefully. I have had great success with that strain. That said, I only used it as a “back up” when I didn’t have a liquid strain available.
I have had a few people mention a lemon character with lagers made with 34/70. I strained to find it (not even with confirmation biased at that point), but I think they may be super tasters who have higher sensitivities in their palettes.
I’ve never gotten diacetyl from 34/70, and I handle it no differently from other strains. My biggest gripe with 34/70 is that it’s so clean, it has no character. It’s bland and boring. I just finished an American light lager made with it, and it was a great beer; 34/70 is well-suited for that style. But if I want any lager yeast character whatsoever, I use something else, namely WLP940.
That’s my thoughts on 34/70 as well. It’s not a bad yeast by any stretch of the imagination, it’s just that there are other yeast strains that I prefer for most applications. I still keep several packets of 34/70 on hand at all times. It is a rock solid performer and will put up with all kinds of abuse and still crank out good beer.
I’ve never gotten lemon from 34/70, either. I also use Sterling with it almost exclusively, which also can give some lemon, and I still can’t say that I’ve ever noticed it.
Could you expand on how it needs to be handled carefully? I find it to be one of the most forgiving strains and have never gotten diacetyl.
Just a diacetyl rest is all I was referring to in conjunction with a forced diacetyl test. Honestly I have used this interchangeably in a production setting with 2124. I preferred to use the liquid strain because it seemed to last more gens than the 34/70. 2124 definitely will throw diacetyl and I handled both strains the same.
It is possible I have not had it (34/70) throw diacetyl and I am misremembering it with 2124 … but I’m pretty sure it has. Or maybe not.
Another fan of 34/70 here. To the point that it’s become the only lager yeast I use any more.
I brew 10 gallon batches and split into two plastic Big Mouth Bubbler fermentors. I split three packets of 34/70 between the two, lower them into a small chest freezer set at 50°F, let them ferment for three weeks, then keg and put in the keezer set at 34°F, force-carbing after a couple of days. No diacetyl rest. Never any problems with diacetyl, other off-flavors, or under attenuation. The convenience of having dry lager yeast with longer expiration dates on hand compared to the old days of making starters to build up liquid yeast is worth it to me.
Back in the pre-34/70 days, I was very fond of WY2278 for pilsners and WY2308 Munich for dunkel and bock beer. Either of those two for O’fest and Maibock.
34/70 was pretty much my go to lager yeast til I ran across Lallemand Diamond Lager. Now that’s what I keep on hand.
So Diamond is better? In what ways? I haven’t used Diamond yet.
Seems the beer comes out cleaner and crisper. Haven’t done a split brew yet, but that’s my impression from back to back batches.
I’m looking forward to trying the Diamond lager yeast soon. Maybe even next week.