Safale US-56

[hophead]

Hey brewers,

I haven't used dried yeast in a very long time, but I see a product
called US-56 which I presume is supposed to be similar to Wyeast 1056.
Anybody have any experience comparing the two?

I'd like to brew an APA shortly and don't really have time for a
starter: US-56 would be the ticket if it's close in character.

Thanks,

--
hop

[Dan Logcher]

I use Safale S-05 (was US-56) for years now, and its great!
I don't do starters or even rehydrate, starts going full blown
in 12 hours.

--
Dan

[hophead]

In article <4b84540d$0$494$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>,
dlogcher*xspam*@comcast.net says...

>
> I use Safale S-05 (was US-56) for years now, and its great!
> I don't do starters or even rehydrate, starts going full blown
> in 12 hours.

Thanks Dan,

that's what I was hoping to hear!

Back when I used a lot of dried yeast I rarely bothered rehydrating
either after some experimentation. I know that theoretically it's better
to rehydrate, but I found in practice I couldn't tell any difference.

[Dan Logcher]

Since I'm doing extract, I just dump in the yeast and top off with
cold tap. It helps aerate the wort while mixing the dried yeast.
I've certainly seen a quicker start from S-05 than liquid US-05.

--
Dan

[Joel]

Dan Logcher <dlogcher*xspam*@comcast.net> wrote:

To explicitly answer the question, Safale US-05 is similar to
Wyeast 1056 in that both ferment well and have a high alcohol
tolerance. I have used both yeasts extensively, and find the
US-05 can throw a bit of acetadehyde and ferment not quite as
crisp and clean as the 1056. That, however, doesn't prevent me
from using the US-05 quite often.
--
Joel Plutchak

"New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any
other reason but because they are not already common." - John Locke

[hophead]

In article <hm3bql$ji1$1...@barley.ncsa.uiuc.edu>, plut...@see.headers
says...

> To explicitly answer the question, Safale US-05 is similar to
> Wyeast 1056 in that both ferment well and have a high alcohol
> tolerance. I have used both yeasts extensively, and find the
> US-05 can throw a bit of acetadehyde and ferment not quite as
> crisp and clean as the 1056. That, however, doesn't prevent me
> from using the US-05 quite often.

Thanks Joel - I think it will meet my needs.

I'd probably prefer the crispness of 1056, but it's not a big enough
deal to scare me off.

[John Bleichert]

My only complaint about S05 is that it's not the best
flocculator. Takes some time in secondary to clear. Otherwise, and if
you're patient, it's a nice yeast.

JB

--
-----------------------------------------------
The heat from below can burn your eyes out!!

[Dan Logcher]

John Bleichert wrote:
> On 2010-02-24, hophead <al...@dev.nul> wrote:
>
>>In article <hm3bql$ji1$1...@barley.ncsa.uiuc.edu>, plut...@see.headers
>>says...
>>
>>
>>> To explicitly answer the question, Safale US-05 is similar to
>>>Wyeast 1056 in that both ferment well and have a high alcohol
>>>tolerance. I have used both yeasts extensively, and find the
>>>US-05 can throw a bit of acetadehyde and ferment not quite as
>>>crisp and clean as the 1056. That, however, doesn't prevent me
>>>from using the US-05 quite often.
>>
>>Thanks Joel - I think it will meet my needs.
>>
>>I'd probably prefer the crispness of 1056, but it's not a big enough
>>deal to scare me off.
>
>
> My only complaint about S05 is that it's not the best
> flocculator. Takes some time in secondary to clear. Otherwise, and if
> you're patient, it's a nice yeast.

I usually secondary for at least a week, more if I have something already
on tap. Comes out pretty clear after a week, but definately better after
2-3.

--
Dan