1. One Hundred Mags (Rule). Check out the sneak peek of BeerAdvocate magazine #100, plus some of the changes coming your way.

Yeast Substitution for Robust Porter

Discussion in 'Homebrewing' started by ggilman, Oct 11, 2012.

  1. ggilman

    ggilman Savant (250) Maine Nov 9, 2009

  2. My niece purchased that kit as a birthday present for my wife. My ‘job’ was to brew the birthday beer.

    I typically don’t brew kit beers since I am an experienced homebrewer and I prefer to formulate my own recipes. That kit came with the suggested dry yeast: US-05. I brewed using the US-05 and it came out very good.

    Is there a particular reason you don’t want to use Wyeast 1187?

    Cheers!

    P.S. I have never brewed with toasted oak cubes.
     
  3. I used 2 oz of medium toast American oak cubes in a 1.063OG stout for 2 weeks in secondary and was quite pleased with the results. Subtle, smooth, background oakyness that I think complimented the stout but didn't stand out much.

    My $.02
     
    ggilman likes this.
  4. Homebrew42

    Homebrew42 Savant (435) New York Dec 20, 2006

    There are many yeasts that would work well in that beer, essentially any English or American ale yeast will do fine. Personally I like Wyeast 1028, others that would work well include 1056, 1084, 1968, US-05 as suggested above, among others.
     
    ggilman and Ruslanchik like this.
  5. Irish Ale yeast is probably my favorite for use in porters.
     
  6. VikeMan

    VikeMan Champion (820) Pennsylvania Jul 12, 2009

    1028 is my go to yeast for Porters.
     
    ggilman likes this.
  7. barfdiggs

    barfdiggs Savant (420) California Mar 22, 2011

    I'd assume a lot of diacetyl production, and its finicky nature.
     
    ggilman likes this.
  8. Ruslanchik

    Ruslanchik Aficionado (195) Texas Feb 12, 2008

    I brewed a modified version of Jamil's robust porter using WLP002. It was delicious. Tasted a lot like Left Hand's Black Jack Porter.
     
  9. Ward,

    I was guessing that the OP might be concerned about diacetyl but I didn’t want to ‘lead the witness’ so to speak.

    If the OP is concerned about diacetyl wrt 1187 there is an easy solution: just leave the beer in the primary a few more days to permit the diacetyl to be processed by the yeast.

    A brewpub local to me uses 1187 as their house ale yeast. When I learned this (in conversation with the brewer) I blurted out: “But I don’t taste diacetyl in any of your ales!” He replied with a smile: That is because we let the beer sit in the fermenters for a couple of days to process the diacetyl.

    For the ‘scientists’ out there, here is a nice discussion of the diacetyl timeline courtesy of Chris White: http://www.whitelabs.com/beer/Diacetyl_Time_Line.pdf

    You made mention of: “its finicky nature”. Any details here? The local brewpub brewer really likes this yeast; I am guessing because it drops bright; below is the Wyeast description of 1187:

    “YEAST STRAIN: 1187 | Ringwood Ale™

    A top cropping yeast strain with unique fermentation and flavor characteristics. Expect distinct fruit esters with a malty, complex profile. Flocculation is high, and the beer will clear well without filtration. A thorough diacetyl rest is recommended after fermentation is complete.”

    Cheers!

    Jack
     
    ggilman likes this.
  10. VikeMan

    VikeMan Champion (820) Pennsylvania Jul 12, 2009

    I don't know for sure what barfdiggs had in mind, but my guess would be it's that 1187 has a tendency to flocculate before finishing the job and has to be roused.
     
  11. barfdiggs

    barfdiggs Savant (420) California Mar 22, 2011

    Yep.
     
  12. barfdiggs

    barfdiggs Savant (420) California Mar 22, 2011

    Hi Jack,

    Its exactly what Vikeman said. I've had it drop clear and require rousing a couple times before it was done, nothing major. I had more issues with diacetyl production using it, although this was when I just started homebrewing, and haven't had as much of a problem since. I do tend to prefer the flavor profile of some of the other english strains a little better (e.g. WY1968, 1429, 1318) depending on the style.

    Thanks btw for the article... I never had amino acid anabolism in my undergrad biochem classes, so its always fun to read about it in fun things like in beer flavor production :)
     
  13. ipas-for-life

    ipas-for-life Savant (410) Virginia Feb 28, 2012

    I did the NB bourbon barrel porter recently and the instructions said to use 16oz of bourbon and soak the cubes for 24 to 48 hours and dump the whole thing in. I used 12oz to soak the oak cubes and two vanilla beans for 10 days in a mason jar and dumped the whole thing in. I tasted it at bottling time and it was the best of the six beers I have done by far. I used the recommended wyeast 1728 Scottish ale yeast. I'm still a newbie so I don't have any advise on whether to use it or not. But I can tell you from preliminary testing that it goes well with the bourbon barrel version.
     
    ggilman likes this.
  14. MMAJYK

    MMAJYK Savant (455) Georgia Jun 26, 2007

    Like the other guys, I really like US05, 1968, and 1028. 1084 Irish Ale is a good one too. In my most recent Robust Porter, I used Wyeast 1098 British Ale and it's my favorite yet.
     
  15. ggilman

    ggilman Savant (250) Maine Nov 9, 2009

    Thanks for all your great responses! Yes, as you guessed, I was afraid of diacetyl. I live in Maine, which I think is the Ringwood capital of the US. I'm never a fan of the off flavors, and even though I've heard with the suggested rest it will be ok, I just didn't want to chance it.

    Thanks again everyone!
     
  16. Scottish ale 1728
     
    ditch likes this.
  17. FATC1TY

    FATC1TY Moderator (860) Georgia Feb 12, 2012 Staff Member

    I like 1968 in some porters, personally.
     
  18. Jaysus

    Jaysus Savant (260) Pennsylvania Jan 16, 2003

    I would use S-04 if I were in a similar situation...