# Wyeast 1056 V Us-56



## Beer Krout (14/9/06)

Hi Guys

I'm yet to use both yeasts and compare.
I was just after anybodies opinion as to whether the finished product turns out pretty similar (in the end).

I was reading in the latest copy of Zymurgy about their comparisons between dry and wet 56. They seem to conclude with limited data and tests that there wasn't much difference.

I recently tried US-56 with a low hopped American Amber and it appears to have that taste (not very good at describing it) that I'd associated other dry yeasts, I had tried over a year ago. To be fair the beer is only two weeks in the bottle.

Anyway this was one of the reasons why I switched to liquid yeast was to get away from this flavour. 

Anyone like to comment on what they have found?

Cheers
BK

edited: to make sense


----------



## Kai (14/9/06)

I've read that article too and found it a little disappointing. However, I've used both US-56 and 1056 a few times and have not noticed much of a difference. US-56 seemed to floc slightly better, but I haven't used it enough to confirm.

I have not noticed any dried yeast flavour from US-56, beers I've done with it have all had a very neutral yeast profile. I'd always use it over 1056 unless I had some 1056 cultures ready to hand.


----------



## Voosher (14/9/06)

Some discussion re 1056 v US-56 here.

Personally I think 1056 gives a slightly better flavour; US-56 finishes just a bit drier. The difference however is minute. For the record I prefer other liquid US yeasts to 1056 but happily keep US-56 as a standby-dry. And I agree with Kai - US-56 floccs better making it preferable for a lot of brewers over the often cloudy 1056.


----------



## Screwtop (14/9/06)

There is a difficulty with comparing yeasts, even the same strains in liquid or dried forms. The dried pitch of one 11.5g sachet properly rehydrated would have a higher cell count than a smack pack, also different wort compositions will give different results. Used US-56 in my last 3 brews, same use by date and batch numbers. All were reconstituted in 110ml of 25C water, mixed to a slurry rested for 20 min then whisked and rested for 30 min before pitching. First one did not take off at all, is down 36 points after 11 days. The next reached a good krausen and is down 40 points in 7 days and the last was working well and had deposited a big yeast cake, gave all of the fermenters a little rouse (rotate) yesterday. Tonight (day 5) the bloody thing had to have a blow-off tube inserted as it was crawling out of the airlock. All fermented at 19C.

Differing wort compositions, and OG's 1044, 1054, 1052

Go figure.


----------



## Beer Krout (14/9/06)

Thanks guys

Thanks for the link Voosher. 
Should have looked at that before posting a new topic.

You know, I usually do a search before a post.
But neglected to this time. 
Go figure.

BK


----------



## browndog (15/9/06)

I'm not a microbiologist's buttcrack, but if you have two lots of yeasts with the same DNA whether they be dried or wet then I would imagine that they would behave the same way when presented with something to digest. (rehydrate the dried yeast and it is wet again right?) Mike, it may not be the gravity of the worts that are the main instigator here, but the mash temp! You know, fermentables and all that. I have been using the no-chill method for quite a while now and from the kettle the wort goes direct to the fermenter at 90C or so, cools overnight and pitch with US-56 the next afternoon with no airation and I've not had any probs with it. Sorry about the hijack.

cheers

Browndog


----------



## Screwtop (15/9/06)

browndog said:


> I'm not a microbiologist's buttcrack, but if you have two lots of yeasts with the same DNA whether they be dried or wet then I would imagine that they would behave the same way when presented with something to digest. (rehydrate the dried yeast and it is wet again right?) Mike, it may not be the gravity of the worts that are the main instigator here, but the mash temp! You know, fermentables and all that. I have been using the no-chill method for quite a while now and from the kettle the wort goes direct to the fermenter at 90C or so, cools overnight and pitch with US-56 the next afternoon with no airation and I've not had any probs with it. Sorry about the hijack.
> 
> cheers
> 
> Browndog




Spot on Browndog, Dave Logsdon's words, "it all starts in the mash tun". Wort composition depends on the addition of malts such as crystal etc but mostly on mash temps and schedules. The three brews mentioned in my previous post were fairly similar grain bills but mash temps and schedules were all different. Have you ever seen 56 climb out of the airlock after 5 days, was worried it was an infection. The taste test revealed a nice clean yeast taste. 

Look at the amount of yeastcake on the bottom, the whole headspace was filled and the yeast was coming out through the blow off tube for 12 hrs. One 11.5g pack, they must have found my wort real sexy.


----------



## goatherder (22/9/06)

Screwtop said:


> Have you ever seen 56 climb out of the airlock after 5 days, was worried it was an infection. The taste test revealed a nice clean yeast taste.



Yep, happened to me a while back, using Wyeast 1056. I posted it here and most people thought I was crazy. The american brown turned out great though!


----------



## Kai (22/9/06)

browndog said:


> I'm not a microbiologist's buttcrack, but if you have two lots of yeasts with the same DNA whether they be dried or wet then I would imagine that they would behave the same way when presented with something to digest. (rehydrate the dried yeast and it is wet again right?)



Ever frozen and thawed an apple? Not quite the same, right?

Not a perfect analogy, but the same applies to yeast. Different yeasts have different dessication tolerances so drying and reconstituting them does not necessarily leave you with the same behavioural patterns.


----------



## Trough Lolly (25/9/06)

The main difference I've found between US-56 and 1056 is the ability of 1056 to give a much better result with repitching, compared to US-56. Sure they appear to give quite similar results with one off batches, but you should detect a substantial improvement with 1056 if you repitch fresh wort onto the slurry. 
Yes, there are a myriad variables involved, including hop and break material from the previous batch, but IMHO, 1056 is one of those yeast strains that tends to do better when you repitch wort onto an established cake.
The main reason I use US-56 is the sheer convenience of directly pitching it at room temp without rehydration.
Cheers,
TL


----------

