WLP001 vs WyEast 1056 vs US-05

[JoKing]

Here is my opinion on the matter.

Wyeast 1056 = US-05... they behave the same in every way. I've been doing little observations over the last few years. It might be worth a split batch to finalise these opinions, however they both need fining in the fermenter to aid in flocculation, they are both producers of "vanilla" type esters at 22 degrees plus... also they both ferment quite happily at the 15 degree mark.

WLP001 on the other hand drops bright at 5 degrees and less... it also flocs on its own at room temp (over time). At warmer temps, the ester is "fruity" compared to "vanillary". The palate this yeast creates is fuller compared to the other 2 - the mouthfeel as a result has more "presence"...

In my opinion - out of the 3 strains, WLP001 is superior. Dont get me wrong though: they are all very good strains, however if I were to choose 1 out of the lot... I'd pick 001.

Let the debate rage.

[Mike Neilson]

My opinion is that I need to try 001 to even comment!!

[denimglen]

Same, have been strictly US-05 for American ales since I started brewing. Have just ordered a propagator of 1056 and 1272, also have a USBrown going right now with 1272. So maybe I'll be fit to comment later.

[Stu McKinlay]

I've used US05 and it doesn't act quite like 1056 reads.

However... most of the beers I brew with it are far too big to really know.

When I think of these lab rats brewing 1.040 test batches with hardly any hops to check the yeast profile I am so glad that they are doing all the work. Them and Mr Cherry (now that he's finished the hop analysis).

[Alasdair]

I haven't had the 05 esters (stonefruit?) from 1056 or 001. But I've had flocc issues with all three. I prefer 1056 to 05 for beers in the 1040-1050 OG range.

[MrC]

I've never used 001 but I certainly done a few brews with US-05 and 1056.

I did a couple of split batch & copycat SMaSH brews with US-05 & 1056. I had a few issues but learnt a truck load. Afterwards I was convinced that I could "spot the difference" between US-05 & 1056.

...Then along came Ged's APA in the case swap. I never looked at any of the recipes prior to drinking the beers and after a sniff of Ged's APA I smiled in a cocky manner as I knew it was "definately US-05"! Then after a couple of mouthfulls I had a revelation as the Maris Otter smothered my taste buds in a way that I knew only 1056 would allow. At that point I knew it was "definitely 1056"! I then proceeded to change my mind several more times until I eventually admitted to myself that it was "definitely US-05 or 1056"! To cut a long story short, I couldn't spot the difference with a 1.050 APA, as it had a lot in common with what I thought I knew about both. BTW it was US-05, my initial thought (from the aroma) was correct.


My current thoughts on US-05 vs 1056

I prefer 1056 over US-05 for smaller (OG < 1.050), less bold beers as I find that the US-05 character (perfumy?) comes through too much for my liking in the milder beers.

For bigger, hoppier, bolder, more flavoursome beers I would use either US-05 or 1056, whatever is available or easiest (usually US-05). To me the difference is negligible in these beers.


I have recently ordered 1272...

[JoKing]

I really appreciate your comments Mr Cherry - it would appear that the difference between us-05 and wyeast 1056 is so minor, that it may not be discernable even by the most trained palates. I still believe that even though the 3 are all substitutble, that they are indeed different strains... or perhaps mutated from the original source.

I also still find wlp001 superior.

However - if they are all so similar, what is a valid argument for paying upwards of $20 for the liquid version, when the dry version is available at all homebrew shops?

Furthermore... do you all believe that wlp001 is the yeast I chose for the Case Swap Ale I'm brewing... or do you think I might be testing your palates with US-05?

I guess it will make for intersting debate when the Swap is made.

[MrC]

I wouldn't bother with 1056 unless I thought US-05 would let it down (i.e a small, lightish beer).

As for your case swap beer, I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to tell the difference. I now reckon I can spot a US-05 bottled beer by simply sniffing the inside of the lid. That US-05 aroma seems to get trapped in there. Try it!

[jt]

, what is a valid argument for paying upwards of $20 for the liquid version,

Is cost an issue - those that are yeast farming would surely tell you how cheap it is to buy a liquid and then use it forever ?
I probably managed my liquids badly, but still got enough batches out of a smackpack to make it way cheaper than a sachet of Gervin or SAF

[JoKing]

What's stopping the "yeast farmers" from re-harvesting US-05?

That would make it even cheaper again.

[MrC]

I read or heard somewhere that you shouldn't re-use dried yeast. May have been Jamil on a podcast. Not sure what the reason was.

[JoKing]

I've re-used us-05 up to 3 times without any issies at all. Furthermore to that, I have found the 2nd generation cleaner than the first...

Maybe they were referinf to the rubbish dried strains found in the lid of kit & kans?

[jt]

I gather that a few people do repitch slurry from dried yeast ferments and if I could do it without farting about with starters and getting my brewing schedule sorted, I'd do it too.

But I think I've heard it too Mr C, though not from the podcasts, probably an older piece of advice - or hearsay