Author: Jake Huolihan

It seems to me a primary purpose of lager yeast is to stay out of the way such that other ingredients that go into making a beer, often malt, are allowed to play a starring role. In my own experience, I’ve noticed seemingly little between-strain variation when using lager yeasts and have tended to view them as being mostly interchangeable. Thinking back on the many batches of lager I’ve brewed over the years, it’s clear to me yeast selection has been an aspect of minimal consideration, as I’ve generally stuck with just a few reliable options, a favorite being Fermentis’ Saflager W-34/70, which is used by many to produce crisp, clean lager beer.

Fan that I am of W-34/70, I’ve been curious to test other dry lager yeasts and recently found myself in possession of a few packs of another Fermentis offering, Saflager S-23. Sourced from the VLB Institute in Germany, S-23 is noted for producing continental lagers with a fruity, estery note. Reviews on this strain have been mixed, with some claiming it works great for clean pale lagers while others tell tales of unpleasant fruity finishes. Curious to taste for myself, I split a batch of wort and fermented half with S-23 for comparison the my go-to W-34/70.

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between two beers fermented with either Saflager W-34/70 or Saflager S-23.

| METHODS |

I brewed a simple Munich Helles for this xBmt so that any differences caused by the different yeast strains to shine through.

The Helles This Yeast?

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 6 gal 60 min 20.6 IBUs 4.3 SRM 1.046 1.011 4.7 % Actuals 1.046 1.01 4.7 % Fermentables Name Amount % Weyermann Pilsner Malt 10 lbs 94.48 Weyermann Vienna 9 oz 5.31 BlackPrinz 0.35 oz 0.2 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Columbus/Tomahawk/Zeus (CTZ) 11 g 60 min Boil Pellet 15.5 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature Saflager W-34/70 OR S-23 (W-34/70) DCL/Fermentis 75% 48°F - 59°F Notes Water Profile: Ca 52 | Mg 0 | Na 8 | SO4 45 | Cl 61 | pH 5.4

The night prior to brewing, I collected the full volume of RO water in preparation for a no sparge brew, adjusting it to my target profile with minerals and acid.

My first order of business the following morning was getting the flame going under my kettle of strike water.

I weighed out and milled the grains as the water was coming to the temperature suggested by BeerSmith.

With the water appropriately heated, I mashed in to hit my desired saccharification rest temperature.

I collected the entire volume of sweet wort after a 60 minute rest.

The wort was then boiled for 60 minutes with hops added at the times stated in the recipe.

Once the boil was complete, I killed the flame and rapidly chilled the wort to my groundwater temperature of 58°F/14°C.

The chilled wort was split equally into two 3 gallon glass carboys.

A hydrometer measurement at this point showed I hit my target 1.046 OG.

I placed the carboys in my cool fermentation chamber to finish chilling, returning a few hours later to find they’d both settled at my desired pitching temperature of 50°F/10°C.

I rehydrated a packet each of W-34/70 and S-23 in warm water before pitching them into their respective worts.

I checked on the beers 24 hours later and noticed slightly more kräusen development on the S-23 batch.

Any differences in fermentation activity were gone a few hours later and the beers progressed equally over the following 9 days. After 10 days at 50°F/10°C, I gently raised the temperature in my chamber 60°F/16°C over the course of a couple days. At 14 days, I noted no observable activity in either batch and took a hydrometer measurement confirming the same FG had been reached in both.

The beers were cold crashed, fined with gelatin, and racked to kegs.

I placed the filled kegs in my keezer on high pressure for a brief burst carbonation, decreasing the gas to serving pressure the following day. I let the beers lager for just over a week before pulling samples to serve to unsuspecting participants.

| RESULTS |

A panel of 18 people with varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each taster, blind to the variable being investigated, was served 2 samples of the beer fermented with Saflager S-23 and 1 sample of the beer fermented with Saflager W-34/70 in different colored opaque cups then instructed to select the unique sample. A total of 10 correct selections would have been required to achieve statistical significance (p<0.05), though only 7 tasters (p=0.39) chose the different beer, suggesting participants in this xBmt were unable to reliably distinguish a beer fermented with W-34/70 from one fermented with S-23.

My Impressions: When sampling these beers the day after kegging, I was pretty sure they were different enough that I’d be able to distinguish one from the other, noting the batch fermented with W-34/70 had a subtle hint of sulfur on the nose while the S-23 beer was a bit cleaner. However, after a week of lagering in the keg, at the time of data collection, any differences seemed to disappear and I failed multiple triangle tests. In the end, I really enjoyed both beers and plan to re-brew a larger batch of this recipe, though I’m admittedly stunned with how indistinguishable they were, as I expected the S-23 batch to have a more noticeable fruity ester character.

| DISCUSSION |

Yeast selection has become a major focus for brewers, many relying on particular strains as the primary contributor to beer character. Indeed, different yeasts can impart unique aromas and flavors to beer, I trust most brewers are comfortable with this assertion. However, the results of this xBmt and others like it suggest some strains may not be as different as many of us presume. The fact tasters were unable to reliably distinguish a beer fermented with Saflager W-34/70 and one fermented with Saflager S-23 is interesting on its own, though what makes these results more surprising is that they run counter to claims by some that S-23 imparts unpleasantly high esters, which simply wasn’t the case for me. Perhaps ester expression from S-23 is related to OG, type of fermentation vessel, or even subtle differences in water chemistry. Given how clean both of the beers in this xBmt ended up being, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit to wondering if maybe the intense esters others have reported weren’t necessarily from the yeast but, you know, something else…

As similar as the beers in this yeast comparison xBmt were, the results didn’t cause me to change my feelings about Saflager W-34/70, I’ll still likely rely on it for the bulk of my lager beers, though it’s nice to know I can use Saflager S-23 to similar effect.

If you’ve used either Saflager W-34/70 or Saflager S-23, please share your thoughts and experience 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...