Controversial Beer Opinions (Round Two)

In the December 2019 issue of BYO (Brew Your Own) magazine there was a feature article about Boulevard Brewing Co. with Q&A with the head brewer Steven Pauwels and even a clone recipe for Tank 7. Lots of interesting discussion and below some snippets.

Q&A with Steven Pauwels

“When I first thought of brewing a Saison at Boulevard it was a reaction to what was in the market at the time. …the Saisons being brewed in the US at the time where not my idea of the style. They were too sweet, under-attenuated, and often spiced.

Many brewers think of Dupont yeast when considering brewing saison. But they don’t consider that the fermenters at Dupont are open, square and shallow. The Dupont yeast produces a good balance of phenols and esters in this type of fermenter, but does not produce the same flavor profile in taller tanks. Our house strain produces a nice balance of esters and phenols when used in unitanks.

Clone recipe for Tank 7

“The recipe got its start as a riff on Saison, a brand in the Smokestack series…the beer was dry-hopped with Amarillo hops which were relatively new at the time”.

When it comes to Belgian ales such as Trappist, Abbey, Saison,… it is not always easy to ‘pin down’ what constitutes a style since unlike German brewers the Belgian brewers feel free to ‘color outside the box’. But, the choice by Steven Pauwels (who is a Belgian brewer) to dry hop with Amarillo hops certainly can be viewed as a nod to producing an American Saison.

I have always enjoyed drinking Boulevard Tank 7 and a number of years ago (2013) I even brewed a hoppy Saison (dry hopped with a little bit of Amarillo hops) as a tribute beer to Tank 7. I enjoyed drinking that batch of beer.

It has been a number of years since I consumed a Tank 7 and this discussion has motivated me to once again buy this beer. Maybe something to discuss in the ‘new’ Saison Saturday thread.

Cheers!

@mrmattosgood @FBarber @SFACRKnight @MNAle

 

Jack, I think it would interest you to know that the yeast they use for Tank 7 is a yeast from a Trappist brewer as opposed to a so-called "saison" yeast. At least, as far as I know.

 

Or a cooler of vegemite sandwiches,Cheerwine, and some 10 penny nail polish for the wife.

 

Some brewers do wonderfully creative things with surprising adjuncts and combinations of things. I thoroughly enjoy these most of the time. Not everybody does. I really love the tart, yeasty, fruity things, with or without a lot of alcohol.

Slightly off topic, what I don't like are overpriced brews that just do the same thing over and over. New England IPAs come to mind. Although I am bored with it, I love the style. But there isn't much difference from one to another. The $5/can variety tastes very similar to the $2.50/can ones. The style stifles creativity (and apparently costs a lot to make). They do have that "fake" cloudiness. What does that? Flour?

 

I had discussions in the past with the Boulevard Beer Ambassador (Jeremy Danner) on this topic and he was very 'cagey' with me here. He did state at that time this yeast strain was not available for sale to homebrewers. I have no way of knowing if this was (is) the case.

FWIW the yeast strains listed in the Tank 7 clone recipe are: Wyeast 3787, White Labs WLP530 and Omega Yeast Labs OYL-028. I brew with Wyeast 3787 a lot, I know that yeast strain very well. It is indeed a Trappist Yeast strain (the Westmalle yeast strain).

I suspect that Boulevard has their own house strain they use for Tank 7. Classifying a yeast strain as being a Saison strain or a Trappist strain can be a sort of semantics discussion. Some folks might argue that for a yeast strain to be categorized as being a Saison strain that it need to be Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. diastaticus since they are super attenuating. I personally do not ascribe to this line of thinking since there are other techniques/methods to obtain high attenuation for a given batch of beer - there is more than one way to skin a rabbit.

Maybe the 'best' way to view this whole yeast strain categorization thing is to just generalize to "Belgian yeast strain"? A "Belgian yeast strain" could be used to brew a Saison and a "Belgian yeast strain" could be used to brew a Trappist style Ale (Dubbel, Tripel, Quad).

One thing I do enjoy about Belgian beer and Belgian brewing is that almost anything goes. Perhaps the Belgian brewers should be acknowledged as being the 'first' of the craft beer industry brewers and folks like Ken Grossman, Jim Koch, Jack McAuliffe, etc. came afterwards?

Cheers!

 

It's not a way of thinking that I subscribe to personally, but I get the appeal.

 

On a separate but related note I recently brewed my annual batch of Saison using a co-pitch of two yeast stains. It was in a ratio of 3:1 of Fermentis T-58 and BE-134 (i.e., more T-58 then BE-134). I have no idea what the source of T-58 is even though I did badger a Fermentis person I know very well at HomebrewCon 2019. I have heard some people opine that this is a Wit yeast strain but I really don't know. The BE-134 yeast is branded as being a Saison yeast and it is Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. diastaticus as I previously discussed above. I have used this combination before (two years ago) and I am quite pleased with the outcome. I too can 'color outside the lines'.

Cheers!

 

@JackHorzempa , in re-reading this, my post might have been unclear. I was trying to say that I don't personally subscribe to the idea that there are "saison yeasts" and "Trappist yeasts."

 

What is the status of off the shelf technology, that brewers could access and operate, that would allow them to identify/monitor or control the evolution of their "house" yeast strains?

Obviously they have methods of maintain their purity, are any of you aware of any brewers that are making any effort to "steer" their yeast in a particular direction?

 

Maybe Weedy (@honkey) can provide some input on this specific question?

On a separate but related subject there is a tool that breweries can use called a PCR Assay and Invisible Sentinel provides a tool/product of:

https://invisiblesentinel.com/technology/game-changing-detection/

As I understand how this tool works is that it can detect for the presence of unwanted microorganisms like Pediococcus, Lactobacillus, and Saccharomyces diastaticus. So not so much monitoring mutation of the brewer's yeast pitched to brew the beer but for unwanted stuff.

I wonder if this sort of tool could be 'upgraded' to monitor/track yeast mutation?

Cheers!

 

I used to pitch forbidden fruit with a Saison Dupont strain, they work really well together. You just had to make sure that you let that beer sit long enough to off-gas all the sulfur the forbidden fruit yeast strain produces.

 

There's nothing like that that I'm aware of. PCR testing is great for identifying contaminants very quickly, but to really monitor the evolution of the yeast, you really need to do chromosome fingerprinting. I'm a little over my head talking about the level of detail that goes into doing that kind of testing, but I believe it requires transverse alternating field electophoresis. In addition to being complicated, I don't think the demand would exist, at least among craft breweries, for that type of thing. As far as brewers making a concentrated effort at steering a yeast in a certain way, I think we all try on a basic level to make yeast perform the way we want it to and that some brewers do try to push a yeast strain to behave in more specific manners. Currently, I'm working on getting a lager yeast to flocculate better and ferment colder by selecting the most flocculant cells, pitching at a very high cell count, fermenting cold, and pitching active yeast in a sort of continuous fermentation. My goal is to get the yeast to produce less esters, flocculate quickly so that I can either avoid filtration or filter at a finer micron as a "polishing" filtration, and work cold enough that I can naturally carbonate beers to 2.7 volumes of co2 without exceeding the pressure rating of my fermenters. I don't think that the yeast that I have now is very different from the source yeast, but rather I have made the source yeast perform in a slightly different manner than it normally would.

I think that in some instances, some breweries that are well known for house flavors actually have multiple strains of yeast in their pitches and that the yeast hasn't really evolved the way they think it has, but rather they don't realize they have cross contamination of saccharomyces cerivisiae. Some strains out compete others and their house flavor evolves over time. Personally, I have intentionally mixed strains on occasion but I don't bank the strains to create any sort of time capsule. In other instances, a lot of breweries really just don't have good fermentation practices and so they'll hit homeruns on occasion and strike out on others. I know a lot of brewers that don't pitch consistent cell counts, store yeast too long, don't measure their wort aeration level, etc...

 

PCR analysis is used to validate yeast and screen for the STA1 gene that is the marker for a Diastaticus strain of yeast. Years back this was pointed out on a tour through Bell's.

 

Aaaand you've officially gone over my head as well

I appreciate the response and I do think the types of things you mentioned about working with a yeast strain to produce better flocculation and fewer esters is some of what I was talking about.

Thinking about your response I realize that the more technically aided program I had in mind with my question is really only available to that rare class of brewer that is both large/successful and still controlled.by passionate beer folks. I imagine that a number of brewers (especially those focused on wild/mixed fermentation) are engaged in the loose steering of their yeast population that you mentioned.

As a plant breeder, yeast is fascinating to me in its adaptability, but also in the degree of research that has been done into its genome. I believe it is the most.common genetically modified.organism on earth and has been induced to create quite complex pharmacological material. I suspect that designer yeast is an approaching frontier in the beer world

 

I am wondering if the tool that is manufactured by Invisible Sentinel (see link above) could be 'upgraded' to do additional genetic analysis. Do you have any further insights here?

Cheers!

 

Yup, ‘engineering’ new brewing yeast has commenced. In 2018:

“A team of beer-brewing chemists and geneticists in California has created a genetically modified yeast that produces hoppy aromas and flavors without any interaction with the fragrant blossoms themselves. In other words, they've developed a way to make beer hoppy without using hops.”

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesal...s-flavors-of-hops-but-will-craft-brewers-bite

Maybe some BAs would know if this yeast is available from brewing yeast vendors (e.g., Wyeast, White Labs, Imperial Yeast,…).

Cheers!

 

Sourvisiae® from Lallamand is the only GMO yeast on the market that I know of.

 

I assume from the name that that yeast is meant to provide a sour flavor? Do you know of any commercial.brews that use it?

 

Indeed, there are some great new beers out there. While in VT last weekend I picked up two DIPAs that are my gold standard, Heady Topper and Sip of Sunshine. I also purchased some Prospect from Foley Brothers. Wow! What an eye opener! There are some new beers ready to move to the front of the pack! Same goes for Kettlehead in Tilton NH. Exciting things happening there!
Peace.
JTH

 

It is popular with small brewpubs that don't want to risk contamination with lactobacillus. The yeast is easily cleaned and killed, as any other yeast.

My local brewpub started making sours with this after I told them about it. Had a beer made with it at HomebrewCon 2019 in Rhode Island. I said give this a try. They and the customers liked it.

You would have to look around to see who else is using it.