Yeast Experts: Advice on blending dry yeast

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Torrefaction

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
68
Reaction score
13
Location
Montreal
I'm entering a mystery box showdown in my homebrew club. We can only use what's in the box. I'm going for a fruity IPA, since the hops they gave us are mostly nice big American stinky varieties. Normally I use something like Vermont Ale/Conan to bring out the hop juice in my IPAs, but I'm limited to dry yeast: there's a couple Belgian-style yeasts (S-33, T-58), belle saison, London ESB, then Windsor and Nottingham.
I'm thinking of pitching Windsor on brew day; this yeast is supposed to give a bit of a fruity/estery profile and interesting character, but it has low attenuation. My plan is to pitch the Nottingham X hours after the Windsor to dry things out. I've never brewed with either yeast. I don't care about clarity, so flocculation is a non-issue.
So, will this work? How many hours will the Windsor need to impart some flavors before I throw in the Notty? (Stats: Est OG 1067, hoping for FG 1014 MAX, pitching rehydrated 11 g packs. Fermenting @ 66, ramping to 70 after 4-5 days).
Appreciate any input. :mug:
 
Commercially encounter people using mixed yeasts pretty often. S04 and US05 or Nottingham 50:50 is common. Windsor and US05 or Nottingham 75:25 another. The theory is pretty much what you say, want the flavour, but need the attenuation for taste and quite often efficiency/process (want to make a 7.7% DIPA with a poorly attenuating strain, but can't fit anything more in the mash tun, don't know all the cool kids use sugar). The 'science' behind it typically gets no further than an elementary understanding of what might be going on in there and then letting taste buds decide things. There are some very good beers being made this way though.

I always assumed that if you pitched a low attenuating strain first, or in a greater amount at the same time as another higher attenuating strain your initial fermentation characteristics would mostly be the first strain (desirable) due to a greater cell count either due to a greater pitch or the initial strain getting to replicate during the aerobic phase taking the wort down to the PG for that strain. The second strain might take a very long time (or fail) to fully attenuate the remaining points due to a relatively low cell count pitched at the same time or later under hostile conditions with no aerobic growth phase.

This was based on reading about yeast, reproduction, having a preference and thus an order for tackling sugars etc. This doesn't appear to be the case from the experiences of others, though for primary fermentations they pitch both at the start. This could be because in the real world it just works, cell counts are good and 'takes a long time' is actually the last couple of days of a diacetyl rest though at an SG of 80 the difference between 60% and 80% attenuation is quite a lot, 16 points so commercially I'd would be looking to pilot any such ideas before committing. Luckily home brew doesn't need to be out of the fermenter on a tight brew plan so you could always try it.

I'd pitch both at the same time at a ratio to suit your intent. Rational is both strains will get to experience a growth phase. Both will start fermenting sugars in order of preference. Both strains take off relatively quickly and are fast workers so that is a plus, wouldn't worry about 75:25 blended overwhelming the Windsor.
 
Awesome info and advice, stz; thanks! I'll pitch both and post results. I'll be brewing this batch early October.
 
Just bottled today after roughly three weeks in primary. Pitched both Windsor and Notty on brewday. Got 92% attenuation (1064 down to 1005), way higher than I was expecting unfortunately. Would have mashed higher (154 instead of 150) had I know this yeast was such a beast. All I get is bitterness and alcohol from the sample; I'll update on the actual finished product in a couple of weeks once it's carbed up.
 
It'd be cool to hear what it is like. Windsor doesn't ferment maltotriose, nottingham does. You should have gotten some of the character of the windsor, but not the high final gravity, body and subsequent poor attenuation due to the presence of maltotriose.
 
The beer ended up being ok after a bit of time in the bottle (2 weeks). I brewed really close to the event date to try to get max hop character. The beer would have benefited from an additional week or two in the bottle, however, hop character be damned. It was harshly bitter (like biting into orange peel) after a week and just getting "smooth" when I served it. Was a touch boozy at first. Overattenuated. I found these yeasts masked the hop aroma. Hop flavour came through fairly well. I doubt I'll use either of these for an IPA again, though. I like my IPAs ready to drink as soon as possible, and these yeasts seem to need a lot of time to mature so as not to taste "green." My go-tos will continue to be WLP095 and WLP090, with US05 as a dry yeast backup: more predictable attenuation, less temp control needs and a way better flavour profile for both malt and hops. All the IPAs I've brewed with those three have been delightful a week after packaging. Hard to say what the blending contributed, except perhaps to the haze, which was likely a combination of hop haze and the Windsor. If using brewing software, I recommend custom setting the attenuation to 90% with Nottingham instead of leaving it at the default 75% average. After doing a bit of research, seems like 90% is about average for this yeast. I might try this recipe again with some WLP095 and compare my notes.
Cheers!
 
I've got two DIPA's on keg at the moment, exactly the same except one was fermented with a brewery strain which I consider very close (but not the same as) WY1332 or WLP007 and the other with Lallemand London ESB for comparison. I mention this because the ESB looks a lot like Windsor on paper.

The brewery strain is not like nottingham, slightly worse attenuation and slightly more esters, though typically still attenuates in the mid 80's. I managed to get from 70 down to 9 and it took 5 days to do so at 18C with a rouse at day 3 for the final few points. I would have avoided this if I'd fermented a little warmer, but then it wouldn't have been as clean and it shared a chamber with the ESB. The ESB is one of the most aggressive yeasts I've used going from 70 to 16 in under 40 hours at the same temperature with no change on rousing. Previous fermentations with it at 21C had it all over the ceiling. The beer fermented with brewery yeast smelt slightly yeasty and clean on transfer where as the ESB smelt very strongly of sulphur which I've had before and was hoping to reduce with a lower fermentation temperature though it cleans up with a little time. The brewery yeast had dropped exceptionally bright upon cold crashing which is a normal characteristic, the ESB looked like milk.

The brewery yeast is usually fermented at 21-23C for 3 days. It can be slow to finish, especially as fermentation slows and temperature falls a bit which suits us fine because the beer is destined for cask and requires a couple of points for cask conditioning. It drops out very readily unless you can keep it warm so if you need it dry and don't want to wait it out a co2 rouse towards the end of fermentation usually gets you over the finish line. If you pitch on the lean side it throws a very nice peach ester at 19C and above which is nice in more subtle beer. Fermenting under pressure or with higher pitch rates reduces this character. It doesn't need fining because it drops so well.

The flavour profile is very dry and minerally. It doesn't really get in the way of much, but I find it brings out hard bittering. The DIPA is bright, dry, crisp and tastes very traditional. The aroma is impressive, but not heady and less than I would expect. The bittering is green and sharp exasperated by a tartness and has continued to be throughout the period I would like to be drinking the beer fresh though it has diminished. I am quite disappointed as it tastes hoppy, but muddled.

The DIPA fermented with ESB is very sweet, but not particularly cloying as it balances with the bitterness. It dropped bright, but took almost 10 days to do so. Yeast like this is destined to be fined in cask as it poured like milk for the first week which is fine for a keg you don't move, but it threw yeast in the glass on drinking which is not particularly good. Sulphur notes dropped off quickly within a week. Aroma explodes out of the glass, smells and tastes like tropical sweets with separation between the biggest flavours. I much prefer this beer, but would struggle to drink much of it because of the sweetness.

The brewery yeast is well suited for the rapid production of moderate strength traditional ales. It has some nice traits, producing a crisp, dry and very sessionable brew, dropping bright in good time without fining, good attenuation with a nice predictable finish which catches nobody by surprise. Ridiculously easy to top crop with a krausen that never falls. As the beers get bigger however the flavours compete rather than shine and it just gets a bit sharp.

The ESB is almost comically sweet. In a smaller beer this would be desirable. In future beers I would emphasise fermentability in the mash tun and grist composition. For bigger beers I would recommend getting a significant portion of the extract from simple sugar to avoid the residual maltotriose. In fact this is how I would proceed rather than mixing the strains to be honest. That said the beer is delicious and does not disappoint, but very difficult to session which is maybe the intent with a big DIPA full of hops. The flocculation is terrible and unless you can live with it, requires fining.

Both beers were treated with a beta glucosidase enzyme which was the real trial to be honest. In case you were interested.

86% extra pale malt
7% flaked oats
7% light munich

Mashed 65.5C for 60m. SG 70. Acidify liquor to give <30ppm alkalinity. 200ppm sulphate and chloride added to mash to reach pH 5.3.

10% magnum boil 60m
30% vic secret whirlpool 30m
30% mosaic whirlpool 30m
20% citra whirlpool 30m
5% el dorado whirlpool 30m
5% galaxy whirlpool 30m

Calculated IBU's 70 though whirlpool contribution is up for debate. I calculate as a 5m boil. Dry hop was total 16g/L vic secret, mosaic, citra, el dorado and galaxy in 8:8:4:1:1 proportions for 3 days at 16C followed cold crashing 2 days and kegging. I'll take a picture if I get a pour later.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top