# Perception



## speedie (2/12/10)

Here is a proposition for all of you astute brewers

There has been some discussion on liquid versus powered yeast

Two row v six malt

Ale v pilsner malt

Hop v hop

I put this to you astute brewers and beer judges

Brew three beers using the same malt bill and brew schedule

Change the yeast in each brew smack pack powder whatever maintain similar strain ale for ale etc

Let the ferment run its course condition the brews keg and get ready for tasting

Now heres the rub dont tell your buddies what is what even better get some one to be totally independent and serve the beer 

I bet my aggotts that there would be less than 15% of the tasters get one yeast strain indentified from the others

Thats being generous

enigma



 blast that roman font shit


----------



## felten (2/12/10)

What if I don't have any friends?


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

You're already living proof that most people don't know what they are talking about, speedie. What do you think this will prove?

Most people like VB. I'll stop brewing IPAs.


----------



## speedie (2/12/10)

As George says I drink alone


----------



## Boondy (2/12/10)

I think the important question is will I be able to taste the difference in my beer.
I think the answer is yes, but that might be just because I know the yeast is different...
Doesn't matter in the end. Comes down to what I think about my beer, the enjoyment I get from brewing and drinking it.


----------



## speedie (2/12/10)

What I am expressing is that there is a vast difference in peoples perception of what tastes good through the power of expectation

Phuck just read any judges reports on a particular beer and man do they vary

So if we are all the same drink VB

And let the media coheres us ever closer too beer nirvana

As nike says just do it!


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> What I am expressing is that there is a vast difference in peoples perception of what tastes good through the power of expectation


Is that really your entire justification for only using dried yeast? You think liquid yeast is magic and should be burned as a witch?

Different yeasts do taste different. Some subtly so. Some dramatically. Some people might not be able to tell in either case. None of this is news. What is this thread for?


----------



## speedie (2/12/10)

boondy 
you missed my point 
it is not for you to know what your beer tastes like because you dont know which beer is yours! in front of you
ie you pick from three different glasses
and say without hesitation that is my freaking beer there!
the one with us 05 three step etc etc


----------



## Fourstar (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> I bet my aggotts that there would be less than 15% of the tasters get one yeast strain indentified from the others[/size]



Personally i'd like to know how you came up with < 15%.


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

Personally I'd like to know who might be keen to find themselves as the new owners of speedie's "aggotts"[sic].


----------



## speedie (2/12/10)

85 % sheep aggottless


----------



## kenlock (2/12/10)

Ignoring the grandstanding font.....

Today I had a colleague ask about the yeast used in steam beer, so as I've got them interested understanding the differences in beer that wouldn't be an outrageous suggestion.

Obviously, you would want to use yeast which are distinctly different in profile. 

It would certainly help to educate the masses.

Cheers Ken


----------



## JestersDarts (2/12/10)

speedie - 
I dont think you have to go to all that effort to try to 'prove' that a minority of the population are super-perceptive with their taste. Your taste may not be up to the task of discerning these differences, so you taste 5 different beers and may say
"so what? whats all this fuss about yeast strains, malt & hops"
becuase you can't actually taste the difference. Or, to you, there is no difference.

Also, I think it is more like a quarter of the population are what is known as "super-tasters". I wish I was a super-taster.. maybe I am.. who knows!


----------



## Fourstar (2/12/10)

JestersDarts said:


> Also, I think it is more like a quarter of the population are what is known as "super-tasters". I wish I was a super-taster.. maybe I am.. who knows!



Also, just because you're a super tater doesnt always mean you will be better at flavour perception, you just taste at heightened levels. 

On this topic and thing to note, typically super tasters do not like the taste of green bitter leaves or green leaf vegetables (and no, not ' i dont like it' but its ridiculously bitter. Like eating the most bitter tannic lettuce you have ever eaten, redicchio x 10). e.g. this would be things like rocket, silverbeet etc. If you have that trait, you're probabaly a super taster.

They are also more likely to give up on eating super rich foods laden with fat earlier than everyone else during a meal.


----------



## Lecterfan (2/12/10)

Ahhhh good old first principles..."perception", the postulation of an "active" mind, the rationalist tradition of Descartes, Kant and all my homies.

But without descending into the uselessness of proving anything through perception (unless we accept certain empirical assumptions and move on with a logical postivist approach - which is of course completely valid and pragmatically to be applauded) I would bet mine or anyone elses aggotts that in a basic english pale ale most people could tell *a* difference between one brewed with 1084 and one brewed with 1056 and one brewed with yeast from under the lid of a coopers tin. 

Now I'm not _necassarily_ saying that I could swirl it around and tell you which was which, or even which one would be the "best" (a contentious and essentially redundant concept when invoking first principles such as perception); but the difference in the finish and aroma of the three would be easily picked as being different by anyone who cared to taste the beer rather than just slam it down in an attempt to get drunk quickly.

Having said that, there are a myriad of yeast strains that I'm sure I couldn't pick the difference between and couldn't pick them out of a blind testing line up if I tried. But I'm pretty comfy with the idea of blind testing knowing that it was between the three strains listed above...reasonably confident that my aggotts would remain safely attached in their handsome and functional housing.


----------



## Ronin (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> There has been some discussion on liquid versus powered yeast



So are you seriously saying there's no taste difference between, say, Wy1469 and Wy1056 (or whatever the dry equivalent is)? Or Wy1028? Or Wy1214?

I can understand saying there's little difference between Wy1272 and Wy1056, but there is without a shadow of a doubt a difference in the others. 

I'm not saying that if you gave beers brewed with the different yeast to people without telling them they were different they would notice (although in the case of 1469 and 1056 I think they would). But if you did a triangular blind taste test and the person was looking for a difference, they would pick them.



speedie said:


> Two row v six malt
> 
> Ale v pilsner malt



This one I almost agree with you on, depending on the malt. I've brewed beers with lots of different malts, and I found little difference between BB ale malt and a pilsner malt. Some of the other malts have a little more character though, marris otter and halcyon should be able to be picked in a blind taste test by some (read some) people.



speedie said:


> Hop v hop



Again, are you seriously saying that there's no difference between Cascade and East Kent Goldings? Between Chinook and Hallertau? Between Galaxy and Northern Brewer? 

It's even possible to taste the difference between Cascade, Amarillo, and Galaxy.

You are just plain wrong about hops. 

You could almost argue that there's no difference between malts, the differences are more subtle (although I still believe that you can pick the difference). The character derived from yeast and hops is not subtle. Not at all.

Here's my point:

If there's no percievable flavour differences based on the ingredients of the beer...why are there so many beers out there that taste different? Why don't all light coloured beers tasted the same? Why don't all dark beers taste the same? 

If they do all taste the same to you...you have my commiserations. You are missing out on soooo much.

James


----------



## Brad Churchill (2/12/10)

True most people aren't beer connoisseurs and even those of us who think we are probably aren't. :lol: 
But their is no disputing that if you want to change the flavour of your beer or enhance different flavours then using a different yeast strain is one of the options at your disposal. Try chucking some champagne yeast in a brew of no chill until some wild yeast strain muscles in and starts munching on your brew (nothing wrong with no chilling, I think you know what I am mean though) I think even my wife could tell the difference then..... :icon_vomit: 

I play with the grain first, then the hops, then the yeast to come up with the beer that I want.

I think that what you have proposed however is a great idea when you are experimenting though.
Split the brew in half through one yeast in one and another in the other and see the difference...

Or in fact make a brew exactly the same but completely change the hop profile.

Cheers


----------



## earle (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> Here is a proposition for all of you astute brewers
> 
> There has been some discussion on liquid versus powered yeast
> 
> ...



Here's a proposition for you speedie. Instead of just crapping on about it, put your malt where your mouth is and do the experiement yourself. Bribie is doing just this with finings and reporting the results, much more informative than random ramblings.


----------



## jonocarroll (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> boondy
> you missed my point
> it is not for you to know what your beer tastes like because you dont know which beer is yours! in front of you
> ie you pick from three different glasses
> ...


So what you're advocating here is that less than 15% of people (general public or brewers?) can pass a triangle test tasting. 

If you're questioning whether or not brewers can do this for ANY two beers - you're definitely a moron, and furthermore, I suspect you have no taste buds.
If you're questioning whether or not brewers can do this for ANY two SIMILAR beers - you're definitely a moron, and have ignored the many times people have tweaked their recipes.
If you're questioning whether or not brewers can do this for two similar beers, _differing only in one subtle aspect_ - you're still a moron, but you've proven nothing apart from some aspects don't dramatically affect a beer.
If you're questioning whether or not the general public can do this for anything less subtle than small adjustments, you would probably be surprised. And you're a moron.

If you've never done two 'Single Malt and Single Hop' (SMaSH) beers with two different hops (yes, I've done several - have you?) then by all means, do one and see for yourself. Don't assume that no-one else ever has.

Just to be clear, if you think that there is no difference between ANY two hops, two yeasts, two malts, two water chemistrys, then you are a moron, and please...







Some interesting references, since I'm sure you think you've thought of something groundbreaking...

http://pubs.acs.org/isbn/9780841203785
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=iQ2cbx...eer&f=false
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2986779


----------



## drsmurto (2/12/10)

Powered yeast?

Are batteries included?


----------



## brettprevans (2/12/10)

QuantumBrewer said:


> If you've never done two 'Single Malt and Single Hop' (SMaSH) beers with two different hops (yes, I've done several - have you?) then by all means, do one and see for yourself. Don't assume that no-one else ever has.


QB Ill have to pull you up on that point...
you missed ' your a moron' from that 



DrSmurto said:


> Powered yeast?
> 
> Are batteries included?


his grasp of the use of 'propoer english' as he touted in the 5.2 thread doesnt seem that great now does it. I didnt pick thast up. Although im intreiged by powdered yeast. is there a columbian powered yeast? is it like columbian marching powder? 

Its dried/dehydrated yeast knobby. its not powdered. powder is a consistency not a state of being


----------



## bignath (2/12/10)

QB, couldn't agree more, top post mate. Hopefully you've given him a good old "behind the bike shed" thrashing with this one and he leaves us all alone, but i don't think it will happen unfortunately..

No more definitive way to figure out what individual hops do than a good old smash beer.

Smash is all i'm doing at the moment, as i'm trying different hops, and i like the fact that they are simple (hard to hide behind though).

100% BB Pale Pilsner w/Nelson Sauvin or Cascade or even did POR's and a Magnum one.


----------



## earle (2/12/10)

DrSmurto said:


> Powered yeast?
> 
> Are batteries included?



I usually pop an electric eel in my fermenter to power the yeast. h34r:


----------



## bignath (2/12/10)

When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...

I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...


----------



## earle (2/12/10)

Big Nath said:


> When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...
> 
> I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...



Ha ha, reminds me of when we were moving furniture back after getting new carpet and my brother got a static shock in the front of the pants. :lol:


----------



## felten (2/12/10)

I guess if you spew out enough shit you eventually lose your sense of taste


----------



## argon (2/12/10)

speedie said:


> Brew three beers using the same malt bill and brew schedule
> Change the yeast in each brew smack pack powder whatever maintain similar strain ale for ale etc
> 
> Let the ferment run its course condition the brews keg and get ready for tasting
> ...



I do this in probably every second batch...so maybe 20 times. I regularly pitch 2 different strains at half a double batch. even did a small triple batch split across 3 yeasts 12 months ago. Everything is identical of course, including fermentation schedule ie side by side. And every time i've been able to pick which is which, although admittedly i've done it with strains that are meant to be different; 1272 and 1007 as an example. Maybe i'd get different results if i tried something like WY2000 and WY2001 where there probably isn't much difference.

Not only have I been able to pick the difference, but my megaswill mates as well know there is something different. Comments such as, "oh, that one's fruity and that one's cleaner" essentially picking the diff between 1272 and 1007 respectively. 

So from 5 people, 1 that brewed it and 4 that are not necessarily that interested in the intricacies of yeast strain variations without a clue which is which, we all noted some difference, with a common consensus of attributes.

So that'd be 100% identification... please now remove your aggots


----------



## jbirbeck (2/12/10)

I'll bet my aggots that my mega swilling family could tell the difference in all of the proposed and I could do it on a day when I have bad hayfever and a cold...

Done all of the 'tests' but not in the bullshit manner suggested, had brewing mates do the tests but again not in the manner described and of course there if a difference.

The more interesting test would have been the difference in flavour as you adjusted the ferment temp of a brew using the same recipe and same yeast. Now go away and do this test...do a SMaSH all Ale and your choice of hop. don't choose your favourite because you may be sick of them by the end. the ferment at different temps in 0.5 degree increments to detect ester differences...that would be more subtle. 

Now which aggots were you betting? non-pc aggots or aggots

great post QB.


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

Rooting Kings said:


> Now which aggots were you betting? non-pc aggots or aggots


My guess is that, much like the illiterate contributors at urbandictionary.com, he is actually confused in regard to the correct spelling of the word "agates".


----------



## jbirbeck (2/12/10)

bum said:


> My guess is that, much like the illiterate contributors at urbandictionary.com, he is actually confused in regard to the correct spelling of the word "agates".



Ugly semi-precious stones...I would have thought aggots were worth more :lol:


----------



## bluenose (2/12/10)

I did just that recently. Made a Marzen and split into two batches.

Used W34/70 in one and White Labs 838 Bavarian Lager. I did it to see if the WL yeast justified the extra cost and inconvenience. I didn't do a starter for either one (didn't think necessary as they were only going into 10L batches).

Theoretically these should be VERY close in taste.

On blind tasting with a variety of people, the conclusion was that both were good, but that the hop character WL838 was more "rounded" and less bitter. Malt character came through better in the 838 and it was almost universally preferred.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## HoppingMad (2/12/10)

The OP is a little confusing, but I'm desperately trying to play catch up on this one- if only to try and figure out what Speedie is getting at!

There's a lot of tangents in the OP about 'hop for hop etc' which are distracting but re-reading this post three or four times I'm deducing the actual challenge Speedie is suggesting is to do a yeast test with the same grain bill on each batch? Am I right?

I agree with the sentiment that a non-brewer can scarcely tell the difference between an english or US ale yeast with the 'ale for ale' statement. And even if they could on taste, they wouldn't be able to pinpoint where the difference is because they don't brew.

But I think most people would be able to tell that something is 'different' if you subbed in something like a Belgian Strain or German Wheat Strain. Some strains like these can change a beer dramatically whether it is spicy aromas or fruit ester. Most non-brewers wouldn't be able to explain to you how it is different though but they would taste it.

But yep on simple ale strains that are more neutral or even using a lager yeast versus a US-05 many non-brewers would scarcely know the difference so yes I agree with this. Before I started brewing I didn't realise a yeast had so much impact on the overall taste of a beer. Most non-brewers wouldn't either.

Speedie, you'd have to explain what you mean by 'buddies'. If you're talking about pushing a beer infront of a brewing buddie who knows the parts that make up a brew I reckon they would tell straight away. If it was handing a beer to a work colleague, mate or relative that doesn't brew, they might taste something different - but they wouldn't be able to explain it to you in a clear way other than stuff like 'that's different' or 'that's fruitier'.

Cheers,

Hopper.


----------



## Malted (2/12/10)

Big Nath said:


> When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...
> 
> I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...








Ohh rubber thongs! I thought you said Rubber Thong! 
I'd imagine that would get looks of shock at the supermarket.

What are you giving a rub? You are talking about rubbing the fermenter right? I know I often rub the active fermenter in the same manner as you would rub a beloved dog's belly. I also often make encouraging remarks to the yeasties such as 'Go you good things'. Having said that, I don't get so excited that I look at the fermenter and rub one out/off. :lol:


----------



## Ronin (2/12/10)

HoppingMad said:


> I agree with the sentiment that a non-brewer can scarcely tell the difference between an english or US ale yeast with the 'ale for ale' statement. And even if they could on taste, they wouldn't be able to pinpoint where the difference is because they don't brew.



Yes but the subject of the OP is the perception ot taste, not knowledge about what causes the taste. 

I actually don't agree that it isn't possible for a non-brewer to taste the difference between an english and ale yeast strain. I believe that the tastes of the two are very very different and that the taste difference can be percieved. 

Yes a non-brewer may not know what caused the taste difference, but they'll know there's a taste difference.

They many not notice the difference between base malts, but regarding yeast and hops I believe they'll be able to percieve the taste differences.

James


----------



## bignath (2/12/10)

Malted said:


> Ohh rubber thongs! I thought you said Rubber Thong!
> I'd imagine that would get looks of shock at the supermarket.
> 
> What are you giving a rub? You are talking about rubbing the fermenter right? I know I often rub the active fermenter in the same manner as you would rub a beloved dog's belly. I also often make encouraging remarks to the yeasties such as 'Go you good things'. Having said that, I don't get so excited that I look at the fermenter and rub one out/off. :lol:




Niiiiiiiiiiiice, Very niiiiiiiiiiiiiiice

High Five!!!


----------



## DUANNE (2/12/10)

oh shit ,ive been wasting time sanitising equipment and paying for yeast all this time.if all yeast taste the same why should i bother stuffing around when i could spontaniasly ferment and get much the same result?split a batch recently between 3724 and brett c all other things being equal and if some one tasted them and cuoldnt tell the difference id just serve that person vb in the future.


----------



## Ronin (2/12/10)

BEERHOG said:


> oh shit ,ive been wasting time sanitising equipment and paying for yeast all this time.if all yeast taste the same why should i bother stuffing around when i could spontaniasly ferment and get much the same result?split a batch recently between 3724 and brett c all other things being equal and if some one tasted them and cuoldnt tell the difference id just serve that person vb in the future.



Or just use bakers yeast, it's all the same anyway....


----------



## BjornJ (2/12/10)

it's a fun experiment for sure, the splitting a batch in two and doing something different.

Last time I split a mid-strength porter in two and used WLP001 (the liquid version of US-05 if you will) on one and WLP005 (liquid version of wyeast 1098 I believe it is) on the other part.
The "US Porter" on the neutral WLP001 ended up being 3.9% plus bottle conditioning and was far cleaner tasting, almost Toohey's old kind of thing.
The "UK Porter" on the English WLP005 ended up being 3.6% plus bottle conditioning and was more fruity, a touch sweeter and just tasted... different?

I brought it to the homebrew club, sent it to the Castle Hill competition and have shared bottles of it with several others.
Some think the US is best, some think the UK.
I prefer the US one, but the great part about it is the ability to test two different yeasts at the same time on the same brew, fermented and bottled at the same time.

I'm sure everyone here does this from time to time, just wanted to say it sure is fun, eh!
 


Bjorn


----------



## manticle (2/12/10)

I know there's a few people who have a history on other forums with speedie so I won't comment on that.

Anyone else who doesn't though who seems so keen to jump down his throat - what are you actually arcing up about?

However badly literarily expressive the chap may be, he hasn't suggested anything incredibly ridiculous - eg: try and see who can pick the differences in hops, yeast and malt.

Yes I reckon I can and yes I reckon most people will be able to at least suggest "this beer is fruitier/more bitter/sweeter than the last but 'reckon' and 'see for yourself' are two different things.

I'm not interested in becoming Speedie's public advocate by any means but just because you see the name 'speedie' in the posting history doesn't mean you should get out your pitchforks. The guy mentioned a legitimate brewing comp and got his head metaphorically turned into a pumpkin (in another thread).

I judge people for who they, are not what their name is. If speedie writes something twattish, I'm happy to tell him I think it's twattish but I'm not happy to tell him I think he's a twat just because he writes something. If better expressed (and most of you should be capable of looking beyond average writing skills to interpret the meaning) there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the tasting suggestion, even if you're not interested in trying it for yourselves.


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

manticle said:


> there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the tasting suggestion, even if you're not interested in trying it for yourselves.


But here's the rub, he's talking about a matter that is well known to all as though he has thought of it, made some wild extrapolations, then told people to prove him wrong rather than having anything to support his case himself - I'd suggest that is what is bothering people.

Plus, a great many seem to generously be giving speedie credit for probably meaning that we should be seeing what the differences are for ourselves. It seems pretty clear to me that he is suggesting that vast majority of people won't see a difference - thus, by weight of numbers, there is no difference. That is probably getting under the skin of some as well.


----------



## DUANNE (2/12/10)

ive got nothing against speedie and think his posts have actually been able to bring out some remarkably good responses from other much more experianced and learned brewers that ive learnt heaps from.but to say that all yeast tastes the same,from my point of view and personal experiance, is complete and utter bullshit.


----------



## manticle (2/12/10)

Maybe I misread him but the point I got from his post was not all yeast tastes the same. The point I got was to put taste perception to the test by comparing.

I absolutely agree that even slight changes in brewing ingredients can give a vastly different result and even VB swillers could pick that a US05 beer was different to a whitbread 1099 beer, even if they didn't know why.

Speedos was suggesting that only a small proportion of people could tell there was a difference - I absolutely disagree BUT I don't think his suggestion of a test was outrageous and I don't think he deserved half of the shit flinging he got from post one.

@speedie: If you are questioning whether different hops taste different or liquid versus dry gives a different result, then by all means carry out the tests yourself and report back. I know the same base malt bill, same yeast and same ferment schedule with the spec malt bill altered by 3-400g will give a vastly different colour and flavour. I know that the same grain and hop schedule with a different UK yeats will give a less obvious but different result. I know that the same malt bill with one hop in one beer and two hops in another will be quite different. I know that the same beer with US05 or 1007 (liquid versus dry) will give very different results.

No blind tasting but no bias either - in the last example I prefer the dry over the liquid, in others, the liquid over the dry.

It's about what makes beer work for me.


----------



## manticle (2/12/10)

bum said:


> But here's the rub, he's talking about a matter that is well known to all as though he has thought of it, made some wild extrapolations, then told people to prove him wrong rather than having anything to support his case himself - I'd suggest that is what is bothering people.
> 
> Plus, a great many seem to generously be giving speedie credit for probably meaning that we should be seeing what the differences are for ourselves. It seems pretty clear to me that he is suggesting that vast majority of people won't see a difference - thus, by weight of numbers, there is no difference. That is probably getting under the skin of some as well.



Sorry for double post.

You could be right bum. As I said - you have a history with him and I know a few other people do too. Just seems a lot of people are ready to jump on the antispeedwagon based on not very much at all.

If this guy were completely unknown to everyone, I reckon a few people at least might make more of an effort to be mildly friendly even if the effort were shortlived.

I'm just not a fan of pre-judging (roman font and bad haiku poems notwithstanding).


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

manticle said:


> @speedie: If you are questioning whether different hops taste different or liquid versus dry gives a different result, then by all means carry out the tests yourself and report back.


Ah, I think I see now. Speedie isn't a n00b. Speedie is Old Man Homebrew. He invented beer. Won every comp there is and taught the West to brew. He's no novice. His brew length is 400L. He is here to tell us what is what. His position is always firm and unquestioning (especially when asking questions).


----------



## [email protected] (2/12/10)

Where is speedie? He/she seems to have disappeared from the discussion.


----------



## bum (2/12/10)

His brew coven meets thursday nights. He'll be in fine form in a few hours.


----------



## speedie (3/12/10)

Warlocks and witches had a great time at the coven but the moment past midnight all was quite not a mouse was stirring

Who is that masked enigma


----------



## speedie (3/12/10)

May I say that you have misunderstood my post 

Put three beers in front of yourself you have NO! Idea which one is liquid or power driven 

I bet my aggotts again there would be a small percentage that would guess right! 

Is this too hard to fathom

Long live wyeast!


----------



## speedie (3/12/10)

bum i just noticed that i have been elavted from a kit brewer farrrrk!


----------



## jbirbeck (3/12/10)

speedie said:


> May I say that you have misunderstood my post
> 
> Put three beers in front of yourself you have NO! Idea which one is liquid or power driven
> 
> ...



depends on the yeast and the ferment temp. There are a stack of yeasts I could pick out of a line up. No way in hell I could tell the diff between 1056 and US 05 though


----------



## Silo Ted (3/12/10)

speedie said:


> Put three beers in front of yourself you have NO! Idea which one is liquid or *power driven *



What do you mean by power driven? If you are referring to dry yeast, then of course you can tell the difference, simply by matter of deduction. There arent too many dry yeasts on the market, so the same beer with say US05, WLP300 and Wyeast 3724 would be markedly different.


----------



## earle (3/12/10)

speedie said:


> May I say that you have misunderstood my post
> 
> Put three beers in front of yourself you have NO! Idea which one is liquid or power driven
> 
> ...


And here we go with mid-sentence exclamation marks.


----------



## unrealeous (3/12/10)

I don't know about the rest of you fuckers - but I'm keen to make an arsenic brew with this new little lady.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...-science-space/


----------



## speedie (5/2/11)

here is more ******* slander 
do you get it or what


----------



## Nashmandu (5/2/11)

*hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah, ive just spent half an hour reading nothing but speedie posts, ******* classic. Speedie; you are a crazy fucker who makes no sense, but every NOW! and then I kinda like what? you-'are doing

enigma,
enema,
nashmandu *


----------



## Bribie G (5/2/11)

there was a young fellow called Aggot
Who couldn't tell gems from a Maggot
(insert three lines here which would result in the last word of the Limerick being "Faggot"

B)


----------



## MHB (5/2/11)

speedie said:


> bum i just noticed that i have been elavted from a kit brewer farrrrk!


Just means you have been posting too much (hint)
MHB


----------



## gregs (5/2/11)

What is power yeast? Is it 6 seconds over the quarter mile? :huh: 

The guys a dipshit. :angry:


----------



## Nick JD (5/2/11)

I would like to be able to buy the entire Wyeast range in a dried form for $4.95 for 12g. 

Which begs another question that is probably better asked on a new thread.


----------



## insane_rosenberg (5/2/11)




----------



## _HOME_BREW_WALLACE_ (5/2/11)

speedie said:


> here is more ******* slander
> do you get it or what




i would just love to know what speedie was thinking when he "kicked this old thread" in the guts again....... maybe the mods should just close it (like i've seen on other threads - mainly *trolling* its probably the same thing???) just to stop this loser digging himself deeper in his own hole.

Dont reply to this thread anymore......... just like most things: Ignore it, It will eventually go away.


----------



## Bribie G (5/2/11)

You mean there's hope for my Herpes?


----------



## _HOME_BREW_WALLACE_ (5/2/11)

BribieG said:


> You mean there's hope for my Herpes?




Just pick off the scabs...... you'll be right! :icon_vomit:


----------



## Pennywise (5/2/11)

What about botulism?


----------



## speedie (7/2/11)

can anyone see the rational path that this follows
dont know then slag
must be safty in numbers


----------



## Cocko (7/2/11)




----------



## Effect (8/2/11)

This is BS...butters is banned and this guy gets to run amok?


----------



## Bizier (8/2/11)

I love your contribution Speedie. I imagine you wear a cape, and kind of look like Dick Dastardly, rubbing your hands together with wicked glee as you confuse the crap out of people who try to utilise scientific methods to better their brewing. There is a Rousseau-like element to your misunderstood genius; a brewing Wesley Willis.

All crap aside, let us imagine a scenario where we split identical wort between two yeasts, one dried and one liquid (powered or not - I perfer a powered stirplate). Which two strains are we talking here? The only dry strain I use, and I use it a lot, is US05, which can obviously be pitted against WLP001 or WY1056, but what about the others? I would like to see results of yeast strains that produce decent levels of esters or phenols pitted against the closest liquid strains, but I am not going to perform that test, because I'd rather just decide that the liquid is the right tool for the job and be done with it. I have not been impressed by dry English strains, but have actually been impressed by some dry lager strains. I am thinking of switching to 1056 rather than US05, in an attemp to get cleaner American style ales, so I am very happy to perform this test, and I am guessing that the liquid one will perform slightly better, and I hope that there is a noticeable difference. And if I am the only person that notices the difference, then that is all that matters at the end of the day.

For what it is worth, I just brewed a double batch of each saison and a sort of old ale (iron brew) and I am switching it up, fermenting one of each wort with WY1099 British and 3711 French Saison. For the record, I expect to see some noticeable differences.


----------



## matr (8/2/11)

Bizier said:


> I love your contribution Speedie. I imagine you wear a cape, and kind of look like Dick Dastardly, rubbing your hands together with wicked glee as you confuse the crap out of people who try to utilise scientific methods to better their brewing. There is a Rousseau-like element to your misunderstood genius; a brewing Wesley Willis.



In my mind I imagine him to look like the guy from the Goonies. Don't know why but I just do.

Hey You Guys!!!

Cheers, Mat.


----------



## speedie (9/2/11)

Bizer

Your comments are interesting to say the least

What was being presented was that the difference is your perception of your brew

While this has merit in it self as it is your brew 

Imagine that some other brewer has done two identical batches of beer using liquid and powdered yeast he then presents to you for your sampling pleasure and your unbiased comments on which is which

Given that there is a 50% chance that you may guess the right yeast, what I propose is there is a marked perception on your assumption if you know which brews what 

Try it with some of your brew buddies and see what results you get

speedie


----------



## Bizier (9/2/11)

speedie said:


> Given that there is a 50% chance that you may guess the right yeast, what I propose is there is a marked perception on your assumption if you know which brew's what


 

Sure, then you have someone else prepare the triangulated samples for you so you do not know which is which. 

The real challenge I see is to match the pitching rate and fermentation perameters, so that it is an even playing field between the dry yeast and the liquid yeast. Do you only re-hydrate the dry yeast? Do you rehydrate enough cells to match a Wyeast smack pack, and go identical starter etc from that point?


----------



## np1962 (9/2/11)

From another thread  



speedie said:


> I would give some credit to the yeast that is in use for your sweetness that you have described
> 
> Some leave a dry brew while others have a specific residual sweetness
> 
> ...


----------



## bignath (9/2/11)

Bizier said:


> a brewing Wesley Willis.





OT

:lol: Classic! Small world when you come to a home brew forum (small enough world as it is) and someone mentions good 'ol Wesley.

****, can you imagine if he started brewing? the songs that dude would have come up with then.....

"Wheaties - breakfast of champions!"


----------

