# Safale Us-05 V Wyeast 1056



## Sydneybrewer (28/2/10)

ok i am going to put out a real noob question here, one i am almost too embarrassed to ask.

is there much of a difference in the final product between the liquid wyeast 1056 and the dry safale us-05? i am told by my local hbs guy that they are the same yeast just dry and liquid versions.

i am a big apa fan and drinker and after some researching i have found that my 3 fav commercial beers all use 1056, little creatures pale ale, matilda bay alpha pale ale and sierra nevada pale ale. now i have been using us-05 to attempt to make clones of these beers mainly because it is cheaper and as i am told there is no difference as they are the same yeast. is this true? or am i way off and beating myself against a brick wall with the us-05.


----------



## Pete2501 (28/2/10)

Why don't you make several starters and keep the yeast rather than using a new packet every time?
You'll have more yeast. Fermentation will start quicker and theoretically your yeast will be healthier. 


You're beating your head against a brick wall. Relax and have a home brew dude.

Edit: Check out the Tight Arse Stir Plate thread. http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/inde...?showtopic=5191


----------



## haysie (28/2/10)

Sydneybrewer said:


> ok i am going to put out a real noob question here, one i am almost too embarrassed to ask.
> 
> is there much of a difference in the final product between the liquid wyeast 1056 and the dry safale us-05? i am told by my local hbs guy that they are the same yeast just dry and liquid versions.
> 
> i am a big apa fan and drinker and after some researching i have found that my 3 fav commercial beers all use 1056, little creatures pale ale, matilda bay alpha pale ale and sierra nevada pale ale. now i have been using us-05 to attempt to make clones of these beers mainly because it is cheaper and as i am told there is no difference as they are the same yeast. is this true? or am i way off and beating myself against a brick wall with the us-05.



How are your clones tasting? US05 is great yeast, having used it 50x no worries, 1056 great yeast, 1272 another story, its better again. Nuttin wrong with 05, maybe your recipe?


----------



## A3k (28/2/10)

Sydneybrewer said:


> ok i am going to put out a real noob question here, one i am almost too embarrassed to ask.
> 
> is there much of a difference in the final product between the liquid wyeast 1056 and the dry safale us-05? i am told by my local hbs guy that they are the same yeast just dry and liquid versions.
> 
> i am a big apa fan and drinker and after some researching i have found that my 3 fav commercial beers all use 1056, little creatures pale ale, matilda bay alpha pale ale and sierra nevada pale ale. now i have been using us-05 to attempt to make clones of these beers mainly because it is cheaper and as i am told there is no difference as they are the same yeast. is this true? or am i way off and beating myself against a brick wall with the us-05.




Hi SydneyBrewer,
I'm pretty sure they're the same yeast. I doubt you'd notice the difference if you made two of the same batch with the different yeasts.

The starter option is one way to go, but there's nothing easier than getting dry yeast out of a packet and not having to worry about anything. Sometimes it's worth $4 to make things quicker.


----------



## goomboogo (28/2/10)

It is a widely held belief that US-05 or US-56 as it was known is the same strain as 1056 and the White Labs equivalent for that matter. That's not to say that it will be exactly the same. Some people are adamant the dry version is not to their liking whilst others believe it is a great yeast.

Is there something about your beers that you're not liking? If so, do you believe it to be caused by yeast factors. If you are happy with the beers you are making then there is not really an issue.

In terms of cost; cost should never be an argument against using liquid yeast as the myriad of culturing options allow liquid yeast to be quite inexpensive.


----------



## DUANNE (28/2/10)

there is a difference between us05 and 1056. believe it or not this is one place i ussually prefer the dried option.i find flavour wise a small to no difference but find that 05 flocs out a fair bit quicker and leaves a slighly clearer beer more quickly.also the ease of just ripping open a pack of yeast compared to stuffing round with starters appeals to my lazy side!


----------



## daemon (28/2/10)

haysie said:


> How are your clones tasting? US05 is great yeast, having used it 50x no worries, 1056 great yeast, 1272 another story, its better again. Nuttin wrong with 05, maybe your recipe?


I agree. I've tried the 1056 to personally see if there's much difference to US-05 but couldn't really tell the difference. I'm just enjoying a glass of the first beer I've brewed with 1272 and loving it. US-05 is nice and clean but I find that 1272 suits my preferences for APA's much better. Even the fermenter samples are perfect, usually with US-05/1056 I'd have to wait two weeks for the yeast to properly drop out of suspension and for the beer to be tasting how I wanted. 1272 certainly has more esters but that's what I prefer anyway


----------



## Sunshine_Brewer (28/2/10)

Sydneybrewer said:


> ok i am going to put out a real noob question here, one i am almost too embarrassed to ask.
> 
> is there much of a difference in the final product between the liquid wyeast 1056 and the dry safale us-05? i am told by my local hbs guy that they are the same yeast just dry and liquid versions.
> 
> i am a big apa fan and drinker and after some researching i have found that my 3 fav commercial beers all use 1056, little creatures pale ale, matilda bay alpha pale ale and sierra nevada pale ale. now i have been using us-05 to attempt to make clones of these beers mainly because it is cheaper and as i am told there is no difference as they are the same yeast. is this true? or am i way off and beating myself against a brick wall with the us-05.



You should be able to perfect an APA beer with either of the two forms of yeast. Or even a Best Bitter :icon_cheers:


----------



## Fourstar (28/2/10)

IMO the biggest difference between thess yeasts is the way they are handled by the brewer when it comes to pitching. Dry SHOULD always be rehydrated in cooled boiled water(im not gogint o debate about this, it will go on for pages as it always does). Secondly, the liquids should be made into starters applicable to their age and required pitching rate.

For an off the shelf, no to little problematic yeast, select the US-05. Your results will vary greatly depending on pitching temp, ferment temp and rehydration.

For consistency I select the liquid strain. I biuld up starters applicable to my desired pitching rate, decant excess beer from the flask and pitch away. As with the dry yeast, your results will have variance dependant on pitching rates, temps and rehydration.

What am i getting at? Well choose whats convenient for you and gives you the results you desire. I personally prefer liquid yeast as i feel i have more control over the quality in quality out and i also have a slant catalogue. AFAIK, liquid cultures are also considered to be purer strains, something i'd perfer for repeatability too. I also find i get a cleaner profile with the 1056 over US05. Hey, thats just me.


----------



## Sydneybrewer (28/2/10)

THanks for the informative replies guys and yes i have made some really good beer with the us05 just i am yet to make one as great as the originals, guess i will stick with the us05 for now if there is no real difference as it is very convenient and try and tweak with the recipes a bit more, cheers


----------



## davo4772 (19/2/13)

Digging up an old thread. Any more opinions on this?

When I first started brewing I used the US05. Moved to Wyeast 1056 and seemed to get better results (cleaner) but in saying that my brewing and attention to fermentation also improved.

Jamil reckons that the dried attributes a "peachy" flavour to beer but if you repitch the dried yeastcake then they are exactly the same. His point being the drying process affects the yeast and flavours they create.

I would prefer to us the dried as much more convenient, given my idle ways.


----------



## micblair (19/2/13)

Many microbreweries across Australia use exclusively dried yeast strains, which was initially to my surprise as I thought that in a commercial setting they would be certainly going with a liquid culture for all the reasons you will find around the web, and in this very post. But they don't. In my mind I think 1056 gives a better result, but I've never re-hydrated US-05, so maybe it wasn't a fair comparison. I reckon temp control, in particular fermenting on the cooler side would be the first thing to go after if your beer is lacking.


----------

