# liquid yeast favorites



## Yob (8/12/13)

So.. What's ya fave liquid yeast? Why?


----------



## sp0rk (8/12/13)

Wyeast, only because it's what I've always used


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/12/13)

W1728. Scottish.

Makes the best Red Ales when low hopping is used and plenty caramel/toffee flavoured malts. Gives a nice slightly tart finish sometimes. I also like it because it works down to 13*c and can handle beers over 10% alc.


----------



## Adr_0 (8/12/13)

2000 - well balanced and lets malt come through, tempted to try on darker beers instaed of 34/70
3333 - awesome flavour profile and insanely good performer
1275 - great flavour profile, very versatile but lots of character

EDIT: Oh it's a poll...

Um, Wyeast - because it's available. There are probably a heap of awesome products out there on the HB market, but if they aren't readily available and fresh, they aren't much use.


----------



## Dan Pratt (8/12/13)

Wyeast - its what my LHBS stocks!


----------



## timmi9191 (8/12/13)

Wy 2565 kolsch.
So versatile - from faux lagers at 15 degrees ferment to fruity ales at 20 degrees


----------



## Rubix (8/12/13)

Wyeast for me. It's just what the LHBS supplies. Then again, it's the only liquid yeast i've used and i've never had any problems. And hey, if it aint broke...


----------



## NewtownClown (8/12/13)

*WY 3463* *Forbidden Fruit* Beautiful phenolic profile. For me, works perfectly in a Belgian Dark Strong and a Grand Cru...

*WY 9097-PC* *Old Ale* Not currently available but try to keep a culture. Got an 11 month old pack recently and am currently stepping it up to replenish my stock. Works great in Old Ales with dark malts in the grist. It's a blend with brett. Planning an Old Ale with some biscuit malt to pair with the cherry phenols - Cherry Pie!

*WY 3068 **Weihenstephan Weizen *Speaks for itself

WL v WY
No preference for one over the other. WY and WL both produce excellent products


----------



## WarmBeer (8/12/13)

1187 Ringwood Ale for me.

Goes well in anything British, plus makes a good IPA. Behaves itself well, and flocs out nicely, without going to sleep too easily (yes, I'm looking at you 1968... )


----------



## bum (8/12/13)

Shouldn't market research be in the retail section?

I typically prefer European brands of grain, btw.

h34r:


----------



## Yob (8/12/13)

bum said:


> Shouldn't market research be in the retail section?


  nope


----------



## Camo6 (8/12/13)

Wyeast - purely because that's all I've ever purchased. Their smack packs are a good indicator of yeast vitality and easy to split.
I've probably only brewed with approximately ten varieties but so far my favourites would be 1272 and 1469 due to the fact I love APA's and English ales.

On the off chance this is market research, am a rillo looking forward to HDA'z announcements as I need to place another order. h34r:


----------



## Bada Bing Brewery (8/12/13)

Wyeast - because they managed to sneakily get 'yeast' into their name. Brilliant. 
Cheers
BBB


----------



## Spiesy (8/12/13)

Results may be slightly skewed as Wyeast is more readily available in Australia. White Labs certainly seems to be pretty big in the US.


----------



## dammag (8/12/13)

Wyeast 1469. I have used it for 'Smurto's TTL and it was very good. Also used it in AIPA's with good results.

Wyeast 1217. I have been using this for PA's, AIPA's recently with good results.

I make small (14-16L) batches normally and don't make starters. I see what's fresh at Craftbrewer, buy it, brew a lower OG beer with it first then use saved slurry to make higher gravity beers. The slurries take off like a rocket. I gave the infamous NickJD some 1469 slurry and he reckoned he used it for 5 generations!


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/12/13)

5 generations. You can go further than that if you look after it.


----------



## whatwhat (8/12/13)

Does a dry yeast count once properly hydrated? Is that cheating?


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/12/13)

Once its liquid it will allways be a liquid. And using cheaper dried yeast is a good way to learn.


----------



## timmi9191 (8/12/13)

Stu, are you inferring the cheapest wont produce good results? IMO Bry-97 out does us-05. , 1075 & 1272 for any USA ale and is the cheapest...

I hydrate it so this isn't a hijack - sorry yob..


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/12/13)

timmi9191 said:


> Stu, are you inferring the cheapest wont produce good results


No...not at all. The point I was making is that if you want to learn how to harvest and play with yeast, start with a cheap one untill you feel confident enough to start playing with more expensive ones.


----------



## Lemon (8/12/13)

1968 ESB,
Great flavour and a monster in the fermenter, it'll do your whole fridge.
Lemon


----------



## timmi9191 (8/12/13)

Fairies muff..


----------



## Spiesy (9/12/13)

Stu, are you inferring the cheapest wont produce good results? IMO Bry-97 out does us-05. , 1075 & 1272 for any USA ale and is the cheapest...

I hydrate it so this isn't a hijack - sorry yob..


Yes, yes you are. 

BRY-97 is not sold as a liquid yeast.

That's why you'll note the poll refers to Wyeast and White Labs only.


----------



## black_labb (9/12/13)

I like wyeast because of the smack pack. If the yeast is fresh it works to get the yeast active. If the yeast is not fresh it will act like a starter in a sterile environment bringing the numbers closer to where they should be for your next step. Whitelabs forces you to have a less than sterile first starter.

From a retailers pov there is going to be a certain % that arive already smacked in the post with wyeast. Also if there is a shopfront the wyeast is harder to display the range as the visual front is much larger than the white labs vial and some way of sorting them is required.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (9/12/13)

How Spiesy.......when I specifically stated that one was not better. Was talking about using a cheaper yeast to practice farming/harvesting etc.


----------



## Spiesy (9/12/13)

black_labb said:


> I like wyeast because of the smack pack. If the yeast is fresh it works to get the yeast active. If the yeast is not fresh it will act like a starter in a sterile environment bringing the numbers closer to where they should be for your next step. Whitelabs forces you to have a less than sterile first starter.
> 
> From a retailers pov there is going to be a certain % that arive already smacked in the post with wyeast. Also if there is a shopfront the wyeast is harder to display the range as the visual front is much larger than the white labs vial and some way of sorting them is required.
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


I don't believe this is correct. 

The "smack pack" serves as nothing more than validating the viability of the Wyeast yeast. It does not grow a starter. It just shows that the yeast is alive and kicking, to some degree. More than happy to be corrected, but that is my understanding.

I've never had a Wyeast smacked in the post - and I've ordered them online a bunch of times, often shipped from BRI to MEL. On the contrary, I find them quite difficult to 'smack' and have often had the packs sitting outside, un-refridgerated, for a number of days waiting for them to swell; when in fact I haven't managed to rupture the smack pack. Often my failure to rupture the smack pack if born out of fear of possibly rupturing the external pack.


----------



## Spiesy (9/12/13)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> How Spiesy.......when I specifically stated that one was not better. Was talking about using a cheaper yeast to practice farming/harvesting etc.


Hey Stu, I wasn't quoting you, mate.


----------



## black_labb (9/12/13)

I don't believe this is correct. 

The "smack pack" serves as nothing more than validating the viability of the Wyeast yeast. It does not grow a starter. It just shows that the yeast is alive and kicking, to some degree. More than happy to be corrected, but that is my understanding.

I've never had a Wyeast smacked in the post - and I've ordered them online a bunch of times, often shipped from BRI to MEL. On the contrary, I find them quite difficult to 'smack' and have often had the packs sitting outside, un-refridgerated, for a number of days waiting for them to swell; when in fact I haven't managed to rupture the smack pack. Often my failure to rupture the smack pack if born out of fear of possibly rupturing the external pack.


How do they validate the yeast? How is that different to a starter?

I spent a couple years working part time at a brew shop and there are a certain percentage of smack packs that come in swollen or smacked and not yet swollen. Maybe 5%? Just something to consider

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Adr_0 (9/12/13)

Spiesy said:


> I've never had a Wyeast smacked in the post - and I've ordered them online a bunch of times, often shipped from BRI to MEL. On the contrary, I find them quite difficult to 'smack' and have often had the packs sitting outside, un-refridgerated, for a number of days waiting for them to swell; when in fact I haven't managed to rupture the smack pack. Often my failure to rupture the smack pack if born out of fear of possibly rupturing the external pack.


Yeah. I almost need to back the Cruiser over the packs I get to split them. I could be wrong but I seem to remember a while ago (a year? 8 years?) the packs were easier to split... so they have evidently made them more resilient after getting a good percentage pre-whacked in the post.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (9/12/13)

When I first bought yeast from Grumpy's I used to get them to pre smack em. By the time they arrived they where ready to go.


----------



## yum beer (9/12/13)

I use Wyeast and White Labs. My usual supplier stocks both and it depends what I am brewing and/or what they have in stock as to which I use.
I like the vial with White Lab because you can keep washed yeast in them easy in the fridge.
Wyeast contains more liquid which makes them easier to split.
Favorites are White Labs Mexican and Wyeast London Ale....though liquid yeast experience is limited.


----------



## brewtas (9/12/13)

The only real difference between them seems to be packaging. On that front I think Wyeast are ahead. Other than that, I regularly use both and haven't had any problems I could blame on either company. They each have some good, unique strains and have plenty of crossover so for me it usually comes down to whichever one is most fresh.


----------



## MaltyHops (9/12/13)

yum beer said:


> I like the vial with White Lab because you can keep washed yeast in them easy in the fridge.


+1 - though the vials are surprising small holding only 40mL but if you manage to fill that with mostly pure yeast, it makes subsequent yeast starters take off really quickly at an advanced stage.


----------



## mje1980 (9/12/13)

Pretty much only wyeast, but that's just because of availability. Around the early 2000's I used white labs because I used to go up to esb at peakhurst and that's what they sold. I think they're both as good as each other, though I do love the smack pack idea. Great simple way of seeing how healthy your yeast are. I make a starter almost all the time. The only exception is if the beer is under 1.045, and the pack I've swollen takes off like a rocket within a few hours. Outside those circumstances, I make a starter.


----------



## Yob (9/12/13)

Ive got to agree with many of the points already posted, Ive used both, but I really do like the glass vials for re-use and staorage of yeast, Im practically making starters ofr every batch so it makes little difference to me for splitting.

just my 2 bob


----------



## pedleyr (9/12/13)

I've not used a hell of a lot of liquid yeast but I have liked White Labs when I've used it - as people have said, having the vial left over is nice, plus they take up less room in the fridge. No really noticeable difference for me in terms of quality of the finished product.

Having said that I tend to buy Wyeast more because that's what G&G stock and that's where I buy my grain, so it makes sense to do it all in one order.


----------



## Spiesy (9/12/13)

black_labb said:


> How do they validate the yeast? How is that different to a starter?


You're dropping nutrients into the yeast with the smack pack in order to get them ready for fermentation.

With a starter, you're introducing the yeast to wort, in order to grow the yeast population.

From Wyeast's website:
_The cell count does not increase significantly when the package is activated.. The smack-pack is not designed to dramatically increase the cell count, it simply “activates” the yeast metabolism. _

EDIT: added link.


----------



## Bribie G (9/12/13)

Whitelabs vials are not custom made for them, they are simply PET bottle blanks as they come from the factory before they are "blown" at the bottle manufacturers.

Having said that they are handy and sturdy for postage and it was a flash of genius for Whitelabs to think of using them. I've only ever had two Wyeast packs swell in the post.

Back on topic my favourites in the Wyeast are

1084 Irish Red
1187 Ringwood
1469 West Yorkshire
1769 PC when I can get it

I've more or less given up on the London style yeasts, I find it hard to clear them and they take yonks to attenuate, often still working away in the keg slowly which is what they are bred to do in the cellar in the cask I guess, but the ones I listed above seem to attenuate more cleanly. (edit: I do realise 1769 is a "London" but I only ever use it in around 4.5% beers so it does run through a lot quicker than my ESBs).

For anything APA-ish I have migrated to BRY-97. I've used gallons of Wyeast equivalents in the past but find that the BRY does a very good job. As most of my Americans are American Wheat, uber clarity not important.


----------



## bcp (9/12/13)

WY3068 Weihestefan Weizen = Delivers clove down low and then this massive banana at higher temps. Wild ferment too.
WY3463 Forbidden fruit = Agree with Newtown Clown. Lovely complex flavours going on. 

But not the ones I use the most. That'd be 
1056 American & 1469 West Yorkshire.

And still consider myself someone working through the list slowly rather than anything like an expert.


----------



## jaypes (9/12/13)

My LHBS stocks WL, but I have not been able to get a vial that has not frothed over upon opening yet - this really pisses me off.

I do like WY as I can split the pack and grow starters for each easily - WL I have it all dripping over my hand - which really pisses me off

The LHBS says that WL is shit but I have had great results with both

Brewed a smash with an almost expiring WY Northumberland Ale - had to make a starter but it was absolutely fantastic


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (9/12/13)

Have you tried putting the vials in the fridge before opening. Should lessen the fizz


----------



## DU99 (9/12/13)

Wyeast 1450 have used because it's so versatile..


----------



## jaypes (9/12/13)

Have tried both room temp and fridge temp, still get gushers. Mostly opened at room (pitching) temp to reduce temp stress


----------



## kenlock (9/12/13)

dunna dunna dunna dunna
dunna dunna dunna dunna
Pacman


----------



## black_labb (9/12/13)

Spiesy said:


> You're dropping nutrients into the yeast with the smack pack in order to get them ready for fermentation.
> 
> With a starter, you're introducing the yeast to wort, in order to grow the yeast population.
> 
> ...



My original post was specifically referring to old wyeast packs suggesting low viability. A fresh pack with high viability the nutrient pack will do very little for growing yeast numbers. When there is low viability the ratio of yeast to wort/nutrients is at a level that there will be a more significant multiplication happening.

It's the same thing with making yeast starters. If you have a high yeast to wort ratio there isn't going to be much multiplication of the yeast and the yeast will mostly take up some nutrients and ferment what is there. As your wort levels increase, or your yeast levels decreased (ie low viability) the ratio swings to where you get more multiplication happening.

Wyeast knows yeast but they didn't want to overcomplicate things with conditions that can't really be quantified. Also they view their market as being america mostly where brew shops don't mind getting deliveries very regularly instead of big shipments every 1-3 months with some packs carrying over longer we would like.


----------



## Batz (9/12/13)

1318
2000
2001
2042
2308
3942


----------



## tyoung (9/12/13)

Not sure of the numbers but:

The cider one
The Belgian Wit one
The Berliner Weisse one


----------



## DennisKing (10/12/13)

Interesting that Wyeast is a lot more popular in your part of the world, is it more to do with availability. Here in the UK we can get both, quite often from the same supplier, and Whitelabs seems by far the more popular.


----------



## lael (11/12/13)

It is completely availability based. Not many stores stock white labs here. As such people recommend what they know, which is wyeast. Which means (potentially) that lbhs are more likely to stock wyeast etc. 

Yob, if this is market research for a foray into liquid yeast, I reckon go white labs.


----------



## black_labb (11/12/13)

It is completely availability based. Not many stores stock white labs here. As such people recommend what they know, which is wyeast. Which means (potentially) that lbhs are more likely to stock wyeast etc. 

Yob, if this is market research for a foray into liquid yeast, I reckon go white labs.


What is your reason for that suggestion? Is it simply due to the fact that many already carry wyeast?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


----------



## lael (11/12/13)

Yep! Get some variety in the market, and allows access to a range that wyeast doesn't have. Not an especially considered or researched opinion


----------



## Spiesy (11/12/13)

lael said:


> Yep! Get some variety in the market, and allows access to a range that wyeast doesn't have. Not an especially considered or researched opinion


White Labs have close to 100 different strains of yeast available... crazy!


----------



## np1962 (11/12/13)

Interesting that Wyeast is a lot more popular in your part of the world, is it more to do with availability. Here in the UK we can get both, quite often from the same supplier, and Whitelabs seems by far the more popular.

I stock both Whitelabs and Wyeast. 
It seems to me that many brewers will buy the Wyeast as it is what they are used to and the whole smack pack swelling gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that the yeast is good to go no matter the date on the pack. 
I am talking the majority of brewers here not the minority that are well researched and aware of pitch rates etc. 
Whitelabs vials are slightly more expensive and the small margins on yeast mean it can soon become difficult if you import more than you can sell. 
Another issue may be the dates on the package. Wyeast give manufacture date and say its good for 6 months whereas Whitelabs have a use by date on the package which is only 4 months after manufacture. 
I use both when I brew. I have my favorites in both ranges. I generally use out of date stock and a starter. I'd use a starter anyway if the yeast was more than four weeks past manufacture but that's a personal choice. Beer will be made without one. Better beer with. 
Much prefer WLP001, 002, 004, 005, 007, 300 and several others over Wyeast equivalents. 
Wy1469 and 3711 being 2 of my favorite Wyeast strains. 
Cheers
Nige


----------

