liquid Yeast vs dry yeast

Discussion in 'Homebrewing' started by CollegeKid, Apr 5, 2012.

  1. CollegeKid

    CollegeKid Disciple (55) New York Nov 18, 2010

    I know liquid yeast is considered much better and produces a better product but I have never used it before. how do I use it? What do I have to do?
     
  2. cracker

    cracker Savant (405) Pennsylvania May 2, 2004

    Well if brewing a beer under 1.050 original gravity and the yeast is fresh, you can directly add it to the wort (fermenter). If you have a stronger beer or the yeast is not so fresh, it's best you make a yeast starter which is quite easy to do and I recommend to make one regardless.
     
  3. “I know liquid yeast is considered much better and produces a better product”. I personally don’t agree with that. Dry beer yeasts are quality yeasts. The only ‘issue’ with dry yeast is that there are limited strains in the dry form.

    I always use dry yeast when it is appropriate for the beer style I am brewing. I am presently homebrewing a Porter and I will be pitching a dry yeast (about 50 minutes from now).

    Cheers!
     
    dbalsock, barfdiggs and Holland like this.
  4. rlcoffey

    rlcoffey Advocate (500) Kentucky Apr 20, 2004

    Agreed. Well, not always. I use dry for a number of styles, but there are a few cases in which Ive tried the dry and gone back to liquid. S-23 for example.
     
  5. GreenKrusty101

    GreenKrusty101 Savant (485) Nevada Dec 4, 2008 Verified

    I prefer dry (US-05) for anything I'd use 1056 or 001, but liquid was on order today for me because I wanted to try the Cream blend (080) and get a Kolsch (2565) going before it gets too hot.
     
  6. Who told you that? For styles for which dry yeasts are available (American Ales being one of the best examples, IMO), I don't even consider liquid. The biggest difference is simply that there aren't as many strains available in dry form. Give the advantages dry has over liquid, though, I'm confident that will change over time. Don't misunderstand -- I use liquid frequently. But only when I need to.
     
    barfdiggs likes this.
  7. I prefer US-05 too, for me it tastes like it leaves a little more body in the beer. I've had 1056 just decimate the sugars in my beer, and leave it feeling just too thin. Even mashing at 156 degrees didn't help.
     
  8. WickedSluggy

    WickedSluggy Advocate (520) Texas Nov 21, 2008 Verified

    I'm not sure what you are implying. Is it that WY1056 can ferment complex polysaccharides? It can't. Saccharomyces C. can barely ferment Maltotriose. And if anything SA-05 is the more aggressive yeast. That's pretty common knowledge. If your 156 degree mash turned out thin perhaps you were dealing with an infection.
     
  9. FWIW, there are more reports from those who have used both that say that us-05 attenuates a bit more than 1056. Carapils is your friend.
     
  10. leedorham

    leedorham Champion (845) Washington Apr 27, 2006

    Dry yeast: simplicity, reliability, cost
    Liquid yeast: variety
     
    koopa likes this.
  11. utahbeerdude

    utahbeerdude Savant (475) Utah May 2, 2006

    Perhaps it is not true anymore, but I recall reading in the past that liquid yeasts are more pure than the dry variety. That is, dry yeasts have some (very small) percentage other bugs. Does anybody have any more recent info on this?
     
  12. My results, I guess, are contrary to "common knowledge". And no, infections were not an issue.
     
  13. Well, for example below is the information provided on the data sheet for US-05 yeast:

    “Typical analysis: % dry weight: 94.0 – 96.5

    Viable cells at packaging: > 6 x 109 / gramme

    Total bacteria*: < 5 / ml

    Acetic acid bacteria*: < 1 / ml

    Lactobacillus*: < 1 / ml

    Pediococcus*: < 1 / ml

    Wild yeast non Saccharomyces*: < 1 / ml

    Pathogenic micro-organisms: in accordance with regulation

    *when dry yeast is pitched at 100 g/hl

    i.e. > 6 x 106 viable cells / ml”

    So, US-05 typically has less than 5 bacteria per ml. I tried to find similar information on Wyeast and White Labs yeast as a basis of comparison but I was unable to find this sort of information.

    I can tell you that I have never experienced any infection problems in my use of dry yeast (and I use dry yeast whenever I can for a given beer style).

    Cheers!
     
  14. koopa

    koopa Champion (835) New Jersey Apr 20, 2008

    I prefer US05 to the liquid equivalents for simplicity and cost savings but prefer WLP002 over SO4 as in my own limited experience WLP002 leaves a bit more residual sugar, clears better, and produces less fruity esters. Again this is only based on my limited experience using the two. There was a far from scientific but interesting experiment on youtube comparing US05 to 1056 that you might want to check out for fun. It was posted by TomRoeder but the original video seems to be blocked in the USA at this time. He fermented a split batch with dry vs. liquid and sent samples to a few established online homebrew bloggers and asked them to drink and guess which was which. Here are some of the responses I could still find.





     
  15. koopa

    koopa Champion (835) New Jersey Apr 20, 2008

    The reveal...

     
  16. utahbeerdude

    utahbeerdude Savant (475) Utah May 2, 2006


    Those are certainly very low numbers. I suspect that the typical homebrewer infects his/her beer with way more bacteria than that from other sources during the brewing process.