1. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $14.99 (US/print only). Offer ends April 30. Subscribe now! (Because great beer deserves great stories AND readers.)

Dry Yeast.... Not too shabby.

Discussion in 'Homebrewing' started by psnydez86, Apr 3, 2013.

  1. So I've been brewing for a few years and have been using liquid yeast/appropriate starters since my second beer. I've made some very tasty beers with liquid but after reading numerous people on the forums having great success with dry yeast I decided to give it a shot.

    Wow! Made a Citra/Centennial pale ale with us-05, and a robust porter with us-05 also. A couple of my best beers to date. I made a Helles a few months ago with wlp 830 starter and it was awesome.

    With spring springing here in PA I'm getting thirsty for some hoppy German pils. Do I dare try my hand at dry lager yeast?? I think so!! I've heard decent reviews on S-23, and even better reviews of the 34/70. Any thoughts on which would work out good for a German pils?
  2. Many say that WLP 830 is the same as 34/70.
    psnydez86 likes this.
  3. I had no idea. Awesome!!
  4. mylar

    mylar Aficionado (180) Pennsylvania Dec 13, 2011

    Either of those two will work well in a pils, just remember you'll probably need 2 packs per 5 gallons instead of just 1
  5. That's what I figured mr.malty would tell me. Thank you.
  6. AlCaponeJunior

    AlCaponeJunior Champion (800) Texas May 21, 2010

    I have used US-05 in perhaps 35-40% of my beers so far. It always does the trick and the beer comes out great. I keep some in the fridge all the time now.

    Nottingham is also a favorite, worth a try if you haven't used it.

    I've used S-04 a few times, also with good results.

    Used Windsor once, had no problems despite some claims that it's "finicky." That beer came out fine too.

    Dry yeast is my default choice, unless I have a specific reason for using something that comes in liquid.
    Tebuken, johntangus and HopNuggets like this.
  7. A packet of W34/70 is about 5 bucks. You need two packets so your cost is 10 bucks.

    I personally buy liquid lager yeast and make a starter since it is cheaper.

  8. More importantly, what did you think of the Citra Centennial combo in that pale ale? I am thinking about using this combo but definitely want to hear your first hand experience.
  9. jncastillo87

    jncastillo87 Aficionado (215) Texas Jan 27, 2013

    Thats what im saying .. that sounded tasty when I read it.
    OddNotion likes this.
  10. Just kegged it yesterday but it tasted awesome before the dry hop. As I racked it to keg I smelled jolly ranchers/pineapple/mango /citrusy bliss.
    Bittered with nugget. .50 oz's of each hop at 18 minutes, 6 minutes, and flameout. Then 1 oz Citra and .5oz centennial in the dry hop for 7 days.
    OddNotion likes this.
  11. Yea I noticed it wasn't a cheap alternative jack but I recently broke my 2000ml flask and only have a 1000 now so this prompted me to give dry yeast a chance finally. I've been impressed with the results so far. Also my LHBS doesn't have any liquid lager yeast strains so until my next online order dry it is.
  12. I use a 3 liter wine jug to make my starters (I don't stir plate).

  13. Brilliant!!!
  14. Lambrusco ??
  15. Tebuken

    Tebuken Savant (345) Argentina Jun 6, 2009

    You can do a starter with a pack of dry yeast as well
  16. inchrisin

    inchrisin Savant (470) Indiana Sep 25, 2008

    I was like this for a while. I thought I was too proud to use 05 in anything. It turned out I couldn't make a decent APA or IPA. I switched over to 05 and the next batch came out excellent. It's great yeast and definitely worth using. Go to liquid when you need variety and ALWAYS have dry on hand.

    I made a decent German wheat beer with the 23. I'm still partial to the Wyeast Weihenstephan strain. I don't hear of many people alternating wheat strains outside of experimentation.
  17. The dry yeast vendors do not recommend that you make starters for their products. The ‘best’ way to utilize dry yeast is to rehydrate them (to ensure yeast cell viability). If additional yeast cells are needed (e.g., for making a lager or high gravity ale) you should just pitch an additional packet.

    Below is a nice write-up from another beer forum on this topic;

    “A starter typically doesn't have enough nutrients in it to properly support complete cell growth from dried yeast. The cell walls of dried yeast are fragile due to the drying process. Pitching dried yeast that hasn't been rehydrated in straight water results a 50% loss of viability.

    Pitching dried yeast into a starter depletes the yeast of their energy reserves just coming out of the dried state while trying to cope with the starter environment.

    Creating a starter with dry yeast is bad for the yeast, and often creates an under-pitching situation.

    Dry yeast is so cheap, just pitch two packs directly into the wort, or be sure to rehydrate in water.

    No starter is necessary.

    I have always had faster starts with rehydrated yeast, than with dried yeast that was pitched directly OR put into a starter.”

    Read more: http://www.brewingkb.com/homebrewing/Dry-Yeast-Starter-To-do-or-not-to-do-2534.html#ixzz2PVcrbnjg

  18. spartan1979

    spartan1979 Savant (430) Missouri Dec 29, 2005

    I fermented a Helles with S-23. Damn thing was so fruity I seriously thought about dumping it. I'll never use that yeast again. Later I read a comment by Denny Conn saying that two of the worst beers he ever brewed were made with that yeast.
  19. I've heard that strain is a fruit bomb, but I'm hearing great things about 34/70. Ill report back my findings vs wlp 830.
  20. I have read the following descriptors concerning fermenting with S-23: passion fruit wine cooler, juicy fruit gum.

    The above was enough for me to decide to never ferment with S-23.

    barfdiggs likes this.
  21. I don't know. I've tried dry yeast a couple times, and it always comes out horrible. I've used Danstar Nottingham for a porter, a brown ale, and an amber ale. Mayber I was doing something wrong, maybe that's not a very good strain, I don't know, but I'm not a believer.
    WickedSluggy likes this.
  22. While others have reported stellar results, I have never been happy with Nottingham. I've adjusted all the parameters and procedures, but no luck. Attenuation was consistently around 60% for me. On the other hand, I use US-05 for probably 75%+ of my beers (it's well suited to the styles I prefer - as should Nottingham be). I now routinely pitch it dry and have never had a yeast related problem. The only failure I had with US-05 was a 1.100+ DIPA I brewed last year. Two packets in a 10 gallon batch. Fermentation took off like a rocket, then quit at 1.030. Fermentation temp rose to 82F on Day 2 (ambient temp was 68). Hideously sweet, hot as hell, instant headache. On the off chance that it would improve, I let it sit over the winter. I tasted it just last weekend and decided to dump it.
  23. Presumably, dry yeast would not suffer that fate if rehydrated before being pitched into a starter wort. That said, I'd pitch 2 packets. Even though the price has more than doubled over the past few years, it's still cheaper than liquid.

  24. “Presumably, dry yeast would not suffer that fate if rehydrated before being pitched into a starter wort.” What you state there makes sense to me. Having said that, I will personally just listen to the dry yeast vendors and not make a starter using dry yeast.

  25. AlCaponeJunior

    AlCaponeJunior Champion (800) Texas May 21, 2010

    I've never had an issue, or really even a preference, between Nottingham or US-05. I've brewed the same beers with both and they don't seem that much different. Both give plenty of attenuation and clear, clean tasting final beer (although to be fair, I'm not measuring attenuation, so what the real difference is, I don't know).

    I always rehydrate, of course.
  26. barfdiggs

    barfdiggs Savant (420) California Mar 22, 2011

    Hello new IPA yeast! ;)
    koopa likes this.
  27. Does Nottingham and US-05 provide comparable Final Gravity readings? In other words, if you brewed an IPA with an Original Gravity of something like 1.060, would Nottingham and US-05 take you down to a similar Final Gravity?

  28. Tebuken

    Tebuken Savant (345) Argentina Jun 6, 2009

    Well, I didn´t know that and I appreciate your willing to let us learn about it.I must tell you I ´ve done a starter from dry yeast many times, these fermentations have performed very well.I am a bit confused, maybe could be there some money interest issues from Laboratories?, who knows.
  29. I pretty much use 05 exclusively for american ale. Very clean flavor with great attenuation. Dries out an IPA very nicely. Had 05 brews place in competitions too. At less than half the price of liquid, it is a no brainer for me. Handles high gravity well too. Good yeast performance has more to do with controlled fermentation temps than anything else IMO.
  30. WickedSluggy

    WickedSluggy Savant (435) Texas Nov 21, 2008

    I don't use dry yeast myself, but that "no starter" stuff all seems kinda odd to me. I mean I've heard it before, but it doesn't quite ring true.

    1. If the yeast isn't strong enough cope with a "starter environment" (continous oxygen supply, ideal gravity, yeast nutrient) then how does it produce good beer from high gravity wort?

    2. The purpose of a starter is to increase the number of yeast cells. Even if the dried cells are tired and in bad shape, there should be plenty of young fresh ones produced if you propagate within adequate starter volume or perform a multi-stage starter.

    I have also read that you shouldn't use successive generations of dry yeast because the drying process makes them more receptive to mutation. However, I wouldn't think a one (or two) stage starter would cause significant mutation.

    I wonder if it really has something to do with the fact that the yeast ranchers that make dry yeast are aware that they are also preserving a significant number of secondary organisms along with their intended yeast strain. These organisms perhaps don't create much problem in the first generation, but possibly can be a problem to subsequnt generations.
    Tebuken and telejunkie like this.
  31. You asked: “If the yeast isn't strong enough cope with a "starter environment" (continous oxygen supply, ideal gravity, yeast nutrient) then how does it produce good beer from high gravity wort?”

    In my opinion MikeHartigan ‘answered’ this question via: “Presumably, dry yeast would not suffer that fate if rehydrated before being pitched into a starter wort.”

    So, if somebody is inclined to do a yeast starter using dry yeast then it seems that it is a two step process: you first rehydrate the dry yeast and then pitch that rehydrated yeast into the starter.

    Personally I would just pitch two packets if that is what is needed. I have never pitched two packets of dry yeast since I have never used dry yeast for a lager or a very high gravity ale (for example: Mr. Malty recommends two packets for an OG = 1.110).

  32. telejunkie

    telejunkie Savant (365) Vermont Sep 14, 2007

    I've found us05 dries the beer out slightly more than Notty....when doing split batch results I've seen results of 1010 from us05 compared to 1012 from Notty for an IPA, 1016 from us05 vs 1017 from Notty for a porter.

    Also i've done several starters with dry yeast when using old dry yeast pulled out of the freezer or for bigger og beers. Works like a charm everytime, don't listen to that old urban hb myth. You can sprinkle into a starter without re-hydrating...yeast nutrients aren't a bad thing though.
  33. I've used Notty, us05, s04, t-58, windsor and a couple of the coopers ones that came with kits - of those notty and us05 are great for well attenuated and neutral yeast flavour, notty clears quicker and packs harder although I found us05 attenuates slightly more. Both have a great range of temperature tolerance too . I wasn't a fan of s04 when I used it a couple of times. Windsor is excellent for lower abv milds and so on - it only attenuates about 60 - 66%. t-58 I've only used twice but it was really rather nice for a yeast flavour driven beer -spicy iirc. The coopers ones I didn't like but I suspect I underpitched them.

    They are typically a fair bit cheaper here in the uk than vials, eg a WL vial is around £6.50 whereas t-58 is only £1.50. Some are still £3 though. I like the ease of use but it would be good to have a bigger selection of them
  34. Generally speaking, I pitch a single packet of US-05 - my goto yeast. If I'm doing a big beer, say > 1.075 or so, I make a 5 or even a 10 gallon starter (aka, beer), then pitch on the cake. I would probably be disinclined to do this for a lager since it just doesn't seem clean enough. That's assuming, of course, that I'd be inclined to use a dry lager yeast in the first place. The descriptions I've read don't really excite me, so that's a non-issue for now.
  35. pweis909

    pweis909 Advocate (715) Wisconsin Aug 13, 2005

    I used S-23 in an American pils and it came out a bit fruity. Not an excellent choice for a German lager of any kind, in my opinion, but not a bad yeast for making beer if you are not offended by slight fruitiness. I'd consider it for cream ales and Cal commons. I used 34/70 side by side with some liquid Czech pils yeast once in a Czech pils, same wort, different yeast. I liked the liquid yeast beer better, but was quite happy with the dry yeast.
    psnydez86 likes this.
  36. AlCaponeJunior

    AlCaponeJunior Champion (800) Texas May 21, 2010

    I've gotten to 1.010 with both using similar (but not identical) recipes.
    JackHorzempa likes this.
  37. Thank you for that input (it has been quite some time since I brewed with Nottingham).

    I am still scratching my head on why mikehartigan is getting such poor performance from Nottingham: “While others have reported stellar results, I have never been happy with Nottingham. I've adjusted all the parameters and procedures, but no luck. Attenuation was consistently around 60% for me.”

  38. barfdiggs

    barfdiggs Savant (420) California Mar 22, 2011

    IIRC from his previous posts he doesn't rehydrate prior to pitching. Could be a potential reason.

    Never had issues with Nottingham attenuating, always been a great, neutral yeast, even if fermented hot.
  39. “IIRC from his previous posts he doesn't rehydrate prior to pitching. Could be a potential reason.” Great minds think alike?;)

    In a beermail conversation I enquired about the rehydration aspect. Mike informed me that he even tried rehydration with Nottingham but he still had poor attenuation.

    I am stupefied.:confused:

    barfdiggs likes this.
  40. I've tried everything within reason to get Nottingham to work for me. Yes, even rehydrating. I get consistently poor results (FWIW, I don't pitch dry on principal alone. I'd rehydrate if it made a discernible difference in the results. But that's a whole 'nuther thread, so I'm not going to get into it here ;))

    The only thing I haven't changed is my water. I'm brewing with Lake Michigan water, suitably dechlorinated - should be suitable enough. I just can't seem to wring the kind of performance from Nottingham that others report. No problem -- I simply stick with US-05.