Author: Marshall Schott

In general, lager beer is known for emphasizing malt and occasionally even hops while any yeast derived character is kept to a minimum. Over the years, various lager strains have been made commercially available to brewers, affording us the ability to tweak our beers to the specs we so desire. Noted by Fermentis as being the most popular lager strain in the world sourced from the famed Weihenstephaner Institute, Saflager W-34/70 is used by breweries the world over to craft delicious lager styles. It’s a strain I’ve developed quite a fondness for over the last few years, finding it to be incredibly versatile and easy to use. Perhaps due my affection for W-34/70 and otherwise biased tendency toward liquid yeast, I only recently heard of another dry lager yeast offering from Fermentis that goes by Saflager S-189.

According to the manufacturer, S-189 was sourced from the Hürlimann Brewery out of Zürich, Switzerland. Brewing a wide array of classic lager styles such as Helles, Festbier, and Bock, Hürlimann was founded in 1836 by Albert Hürlimann who, at least according to a mostly reliable source, led the world in the scientific study of yeast, a fact that made using S-189 all the more interesting to me. Would yeasts from different sources used to make similar styles of beer in different regions demonstrate differences in fermentation characteristics or potentially produce their own unique character?

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between Saflager W-34/70 and Saflager S-189 lager yeasts when used to ferment a split batch of the same wort.

| METHODS |

Since these were lager strains and I didn’t want anything getting in the way of the character each might impart, I decided to brew my simple Vienna Lager for this xBmt.

My Simple Vienna Lager

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 5.5 gal 60 min 22.2 IBUs 9.7 SRM 1.053 1.012 5.3 % Actuals 1.053 1.01 5.6 % Fermentables Name Amount % Vienna Malt (Weyermann) 10 lbs 96.97 Pale Chocolate Malt 5 oz 3.03 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Hallertauer Mittelfrueh 43 g 60 min Boil Pellet 3.7 Hallertauer Mittelfrueh 15 g 15 min Boil Pellet 3.7 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature SafLager German Lager (S-189) DCL/Fermentis 73% 48°F - 56°F Saflager Lager (W-34/70) DCL/Fermentis 75% 48°F - 59°F Notes Water Profile: Ca 75 | Mg 1 | Na 10 | SO4 84 | Cl 70 | pH 5.5

Opting for the 10 gallon no sparge method, my brew day began with the collection of water, which I adjusted with minerals to achieve my desired profile before putting it over the flame to heat to strike temperature.

As the water was heating up, I weighed out and milled the grains.

When the brewing liquor was slightly warmer than strike temperature, I transferred it to my mash tun for a 5 minute preheat then stirred in the grist to hit the target mash temperature.

The mash was left to rest for 45 minutes before I began collecting the sweet wort.

Once the full volume of wort was collected and transferred to my kettle, I brought it up to a boil and let roll for an hour, adding hops at the times stated in the recipe.

With the boil complete, I quickly chilled the wort to 73˚F/23˚C, which was slightly warmer than my groundwater temperature.

A refractometer reading at this time showed the wort had precisely hit the OG predicted by BeerSmith.

I proceeded to transfer equal amounts of wort to separate fermentors, stirring gently throughout to ensure equal distribution of kettle trub. The fermentors were then placed in my cool chamber and allowed to finish chilling to my target fermentation temperature of 50˚F/10˚C. It took about 6 hours for both batches of wort to stabilize at my desired temperature, after which I rehydrated 2 packets of either yeast in separate mason jars then pitched. I noticed airlock activity in both the following morning, each appearing to ferment similarly from that point onward.

After 6 days of active fermentation, I began ramping the chamber temperature up from 50˚F/10˚C to 68˚F/20˚C in increments of 5˚F/3˚C per day over the course of the following 4 days. While fermentation appeared complete at this point, I let the beers hangout a few more days at this warmer temperature to ensure complete attenuation and clean-up undesirable byproducts. At just over a month from brew day, I took hydrometer measurements that confirmed the same FG was reached on both batches.

The beers were cold crashed to 32˚F/0˚C, fined with gelatin, and left to lager in fermentors for another week before I transferred them to kegs.

I placed the filled kegs in my cold keezer where they were burst carbonated at 40 psi for 18 hours before I reduced the gas to serving pressure and let them lager another 3 weeks before collecting data, at which point both were crystal clear and nicely carbonated.

| RESULTS |

A total of 22 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each taster was served 1 sample of the beer made with Saflager W-34/70 and 2 samples of the beer made with Saflager S-189 in different colored opaque cups then asked to select the unique sample. In order to reach statistical significance with this number of participants, 12 (p<0.05) would have had to accurately select the odd-beer-out, though only 9 (p=0.29) chose the correct sample, suggesting participants in this xBmt were unable to reliably distinguish a Vienna Lager fermented with Saflager W-34/70 from one fermented with Saflager S-189.

My Impressions: I was pretty excited to try what was to me a new yeast strain, Saflager S-189, especially since I enjoy W-34/70 so much and was stoked to try another dry yeast option. Given my intimate knowledge of the variable, I decided that rather than jumping right into semi-blind triangle tests, I would sample the beers one after the other, take notes on what I perceived, then compare them for similarities and differences. Surprisingly, even with my insanely biased palate, my tasting notes were far more similar than they were different. Both beers had a clean fermentation profile with no phenols or esters, the Vienna Malt shone through with a subtle toasty-nut from the small dose of Pale Chocolate, and bitterness was perceptibly equal, as was overall noble hop character. The only area I felt there might be a difference was in mouthfeel, noting the beer fermented with S-189 as being “slightly more viscous” than the W-34/70 version. Would this be enough for me to be able to distinguish them in triangle tests? Nope. Out of 7 attempts, my performance was no better than chance– I was correct twice. Even with my hyper-focus on mouthfeel and drinking water between each sample, it became clear to me any differences between the beers were too small for me to be able to tell them apart.

| DISCUSSION |

The fact participants in this xBmt were unable to reliably distinguish a Vienna Lager fermented with Saflager W-34/70 from one fermented with Saflager S-189 doesn’t strike me as all that Earth shattering. After all, both are lager strains known for imparting a very restrained yeast character, allowing the other ingredients in a beer to shine through. And that’s pretty much what happened, based on both the blind data and my experience.

What I do find interesting is the fact two institutions known for their quality yeast programs, Weihenstephaner and Hürlimann, were fermenting with strains that presumably produced finished beers of such similarity. There’s no doubt in my mind W-34/70 is microbiologically different than S-189, in fact Fermentis’ specification sheets indicate as much, and yet both produced beers of equal quality. If only I had a time machine…

In the end, my love of W-34/70 persists and I’m glad to be able to add another easy to use dry yeast option to my repertoire. While the beers in this xBmt weren’t distinguishable by a significant portion of tasters, I’m curious if that would have been the case in beers of different styles or higher OG. Moreover, I’ve found W-34/70 produces a rather fine lager even when fermented at ale temperatures and wonder if I’d achieve the same results with S-189. I certainly plan to try it out for myself and look forward to learning more about this new-ish yeast strain.

If you have experience with either Saflager W-34/70 or Saflager S-189, we’d love to you hear about it in the comments section below!

Support Brülosophy In Style!

All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!

Follow Brülosophy on:

If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support Us page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!

Advertisements

Share this: Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

Email



Like this: Like Loading...