This xBmt was completed by a member of The Brü Club as a part of The Brü Club xBmt Series in collaboration with Brülosophy. While members who choose to participate in this series generally take inspiration from Brülosophy, the bulk of design, writing, and editing is handled by members unless otherwise specified. Articles featured on Brulosophy.com are selected by The Brü Club leadership prior to being submitted for publication. Visit The Brü Club website for more information on this series.

Author: Matt Skillstad

For several reasons, I prefer to have a stock of dry yeast on-hand to choose from, and when considering which strains to go with, one immediately came to mind– Fermentis Safale US-05 American Ale. Purportedly a variant of the popular “Chico” strain that originated from Sierra Nevada Brewing Company, Safale US-05 is known to produce a clean fermentation character that gets out of the way, allowing the malt and hops to shine.

As is the case with nearly all yeasts, versions of the Chico strain are sold by various labs including Wyeast 1056 American Ale, which many view as being a liquid equivalent to Safale US-05. However, despite sharing the same original source, some have reported the dry US-05 produces a noticeably different character than liquid variants, namely subtle notes of peach and spice that may or may not be desired.

There’s no question Safale US-05 is one of the most popular yeasts among homebrewers, and I’ve personally had many great beers fermented with it, though I’ve never felt mine were among them. Before making a hard judgement, I decided to compare this convenient dry strain to Wyeast 1056, which I’ve had plenty of success with in the past.

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between a Scottish Ale fermented with Wyeast 1056 American Ale yeast and the same beer fermented with Safale US-05 American Ale yeast.

| METHODS |

My goal being to accentuate the yeast character for comparison, I went with a subtly flavored Scottish-inspired ale for this xBmt in hopes that any differences would show through.

90 Skilling Ale

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 5.5 gal 45 min 30.3 IBUs 10.1 SRM 1.053 1.014 5.2 % Actuals 1.053 1.015 5.0 % Fermentables Name Amount % Pale Malt (2 Row), Rahr 5 lbs 47.06 Golden Promise (Simpsons) 2.5 lbs 23.53 Munich I (Weyermann) 1 lbs 9.41 White Wheat Malt 1 lbs 9.41 Caramel/Crystal Malt - 15L 12 oz 7.06 Caramel/Crystal Malt - 40L 4 oz 2.35 Chocolate Malt 2 oz 1.18 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Columbus/Tomahawk/Zeus (CTZ) 16 g 45 min Boil Pellet 12.3 Perle 14 g 45 min Boil Pellet 4.9 Perle 14 g 5 min Aroma Pellet 4.9 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature Safale US-05 OR Wyeast 1056 75% 60°F - 72°F Notes Water Profile: Ca 78 | Mg 0 | Na 0 | SO4 135 | Cl 39 Download Download this recipe's BeerXML file

The day before brewing, I measured out the grain then milled it directly into the Brew Bag.

I then filled the kettle with store bought RO water and adjusted it to my desired profile before dropping in my electric immersion heater, which was set to come on about 4 hours before I planned to brew the next day.

That same night, I threw together a starter of Wyeast 1056 using canned wort and bottled water.

The next morning, I lit the flame on my burner to finish warming the water before dropping in the bag full of grain and giving it a good stir. With the grains fully incorporated, I checked to see that I was at my target mash temperature.

During the mash rest, my son helped weigh out the kettle hop additions.

At the end of the 45 minute mash, I hoisted the grain bag above the kettle and allowed it to drain as I began heating the sweet wort.

The wort was boiled for 45 minutes with hops added at the times listed in the recipe. Once the boil was complete, I tossed in the whirlpool addition then used cool RO water to top-up to my desired post-boil volume. After a 5 minute hop stand, I began chilling the wort to my desired pitching temperature of .

A hydrometer measurement revealed the wort hit my intended OG.

The wort was then split evenly between two similar stainless steel bucket fermentation vesselss.

I placed the filled fermenters next to each other in my fermentation chamber controlled to 64°F/18°C then pitched the yeast into their respective worts; the dry yeast was rehydrated prior to pitching.

Checking in the following morning, I noticed the Wyeast 1056 batch was chugging along nicely while the Safale US-05 batch was completely inactive. It wasn’t until about 28 hours post-pitch that the airlock on the Safale US-05 beer finally started bubbling. Once each batch was active, I connected each fermenter to a sanitized keg to be purged of oxygen by the naturally produced CO2.

After a 3 days of active fermentation at 64°F/18°C, activity had started to slow, so I raised the temperature in the chamber to 66°F/19°C to encourage complete attenuation and reduction of fermentation byproducts. After another 11 days, I took hydrometer measurements that revealed the beers reached the same FG.

Next, I transferred the warm beers to their respective CO2 purged kegs.

The filled kegs were chilled and bust carbonated at 30 psi for 24 hours before being reduced to serving pressure. After a couple weeks of conditioning, they were both clear, carbonated and ready to serve.

| RESULTS |

A total of 20 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each participant was served 2 samples of the beer fermented with Safale US-05 American Ale yeast and 1 sample of the beer fermented with Wyeast 1056 American Ale yeast in different colored opaque cups then asked to identify the unique sample. A total of 11 tasters (p<0.05) would have had to accurately identify the unique sample in order to reach statistical significance, yet only 5 tasters did so (p=0.85), suggesting participants in this xBmt were unable to reliably distinguish a beer fermented with Safale US-05 American Ale yeast from one fermented with Wyeast 1056 American Ale yeast.

My Impressions: I attempted 3 triangle tests and failed every one of them, I simply could not tell these beers apart, which fully went against my expectations. I perceived no hint of any off flavors in either of them, and both were equally delicious. That said, I found myself pulling pints of the US-05 keg more often because it sort of felt like rooting for the underdog.

| DISCUSSION |

It’s commonly believed that Safale US-05 is the dry equivalent to other liquid “Chico” strains and hence can be used interchangeably with them to produce the same result. While findings from other similar experiments have called this idea into question, the fact tasters in this xBmt were unable to distinguish a beer fermented with Safale US-05 from one fermented with Wyeast 1056 suggests the fermentation character in both beers was similar enough as to be largely indistinguishable.

The triangle test may not have yielded a significant result, but there were some interesting objective differences observed between the batches. The beer fermented with Wyeast 1056 started to actively ferment nearly 18 hours before the one pitched with US-05, and it also had a slightly lower FG. Since increased lag time is associated with an increased chance of contamination, this is something to consider when choosing which yeast to go with. Indeed, the use of a yeast starter for the Wyeast 1056 beer is likely responsible for the reduced lag time, but seeing as starters aren’t generally recommended for dry yeast, I view it is the most likely use case.

Some people, including Marshall, have reported perceiving a subtle spiciness in beers fermented with US-05, which I didn’t detect in either of the beers in this xBmt. However, I have noticed such a character when fermenting this yeast at temperatures approaching 70°F/21°C, while the beers I’ve fermented closer to 64°F/18°C are generally much cleaner. All I have is anecdote at this point, but it’s possible my choice of a cooler fermentation temperature for this xBmt can help explain the results. I’ll definitely be keeping some Safale US-05 on-hand to use in those times I’m looking for a convenient yeast to ferment clean American-style ales.

Matt Skillstad is a happy husband to a wonderful wife (who likes his beer!) and proud father of 5 children under 7 years old from Pierce, Nebraska. He has been brewing since 2011 and, in addition to The Brü Club, is a member of the Elkhorn Valley Society of Brewers. He enjoys experimenting with his brewing in an effort to make better beer in less time with less effort. When not brewing or hanging with his family, Matt enjoys bike riding and golfing (poorly).

If you have any thoughts about this xBmt, please do not hesitate to share 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 page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!

Advertisements

Share this: Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

Email



Like this: Like Loading...