26 replies to this topic

[Genesee Ted]

I am using this as my house American yeast at the brewery. Ferment at 68 and see how it does. The temperature control on our pilot system wasn't as consistent as the jacketed tanks will be so adjustments can be made if need be.

What do you guys think of this strain?

[Big Nake]

I have used it a few times and honestly I can't remember what sets it apart from 1056... a little more flocculent and just slightly more fruity? I probably used it cooler than that because I don't want a yeast that's known for 'more fruit' to get much past 65°. Knowing me I had it running at 62° or so. But I could see it working in a variety of styles and it would have just a touch of additional character that 1056 wouldn't give you. Seems like a solid choice as long as you're familiar with it and you know it's behavior.

[djinkc]

Great choice for a house yeast.  I use it more than any other lately.  I like it below 65df.

[HVB]

I have to get another package soon.  I used it a couple times this year and really like it.  I think 1272 or 1450 (I have come around to it) would be a good house strain.

[Genesee Ted]

It flocs really nicely, which is nice because I'm going to try and filter as little as possible. That being said, because it flocs so nice, it should be easier to filter.

[neddles]

I have to get another package soon.  I used it a couple times this year and really like it.  I think 1272 or 1450 (I have come around to it) would be a good house strain.

This. And like DJ I have always kept both of those yeasts under 65F. 

It flocs really nicely, which is nice because I'm going to try and filter as little as possible. That being said, because it flocs so nice, it should be easier to filter.

Yes, it floccs better than 1056 or 1450 IME.

[HVB]

Yes, it floccs better than 1056 or 1450 IME.

But everything floccs better with Bio-Fine!

[Big Nake]

I would assume it's slightly less-attenuative so I would watch mash temps, the use of crystal malt, etc.

[HVB]

I would assume it's slightly less-attenuative so I would watch mash temps, the use of crystal malt, etc.

 

I thought mash temp was debunked for attenuation?  I cannot wait to see what the IPA I just did at 157 with S-04 finishes at.

[Genesee Ted]

But everything floccs better with Bio-Fine!

I'm using Cryofine

[HVB]

I'm using Cryofine

Never heard of that one.  I will have to look it up.  I went to Bio-fine a while back just because it was so easy to use.

[Big Nake]

I thought mash temp was debunked for attenuation?  I cannot wait to see what the IPA I just did at 157 with S-04 finishes at.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was debunked. I just know that I have an issue with beers that finish sweet or clunky. I like a relatively dry beer so if I use a less-attenuating yeast I try to watch the grain bill, the mash temp, the water composition, etc.

[HVB]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was debunked. I just know that I have an issue with beers that finish sweet or clunky. I like a relatively dry beer so if I use a less-attenuating yeast I try to watch the grain bill, the mash temp, the water composition, etc.

I agree with you liking a dry beer.  I have noticed that, for me, mash temps seem to play less of a role than grain bill.  So I figured I would push this IPA way up on the mash temp.  OG was 1.066 and this weekend I will see what FG is.

[positiveContact]

I find it to have more character than 1056.  not better necessarily but different.  I like them both.

[neddles]

I'm using Cryofine

Cold crashing?

 

I agree with you liking a dry beer.  I have noticed that, for me, mash temps seem to play less of a role than grain bill.  So I figured I would push this IPA way up on the mash temp.  OG was 1.066 and this weekend I will see what FG is.

Dude, definitely tell us what happens both FG and taste wise. What was the grain bill?

[denny]

I used to use it al the time and loved it.  It was the yeast I used to develop my Rye IPA recipe.  But once I discovered 1450, I liked it so much better that it's been years since I've used 1272.

I agree with you liking a dry beer.  I have noticed that, for me, mash temps seem to play less of a role than grain bill.  So I figured I would push this IPA way up on the mash temp.  OG was 1.066 and this weekend I will see what FG is.

 

When I was working on my American mild recipe, I mashed the exact same recipe at both 153 and 168.  I got identical beers, both on gravity and taste.

[Big Nake]

I used to use it al the time and loved it.  It was the yeast I used to develop my Rye IPA recipe.  But once I discovered 1450, I liked it so much better that it's been years since I've used 1272.

 
When I was working on my American mild recipe, I mashed the exact same recipe at both 153 and 168.  I got identical beers, both on gravity and taste.

Mind blown.

[Genesee Ted]

Cold crashing?

Dude, definitely tell us what happens both FG and taste wise. What was the grain bill?

Yes cold crashing. Commercial

[neddles]

When I was working on my American mild recipe, I mashed the exact same recipe at both 153 and 168.  I got identical beers, both on gravity and taste.

Do you think you will get the same result if you mash your German Pils at 168F?

[denny]

Do you think you will get the same result if you mash your German Pils at 168F?

 

Dunno.  It uses continental malt and I was using domestic for the mild.