236 replies to this topic

[denny]

Good chance your BDSA took so long to carbonate because of the %ABV and not because of the cold crashing. How strong was the ABV?

 

Normal %ABV PAs and IPAs will carbonate just fine with 2-3 wks in the bottle even after 6 days of cold crashing. If you cold crashed for longer, say, a month or 2 then I would be more concerned.

 

My 9.2% RIS took 2 months to fully carbonate in the bottle. 

 

Agreed

[MolBasser]

Vinnie is a cool dude.  I need to call him tomorrow and get some tips on the new nano brewery.

 

If I stop puking.

 

...

 

MolBasser

[Gus13]

Good chance your BDSA took so long to carbonate because of the %ABV and not because of the cold crashing. How strong was the ABV?

 

Normal %ABV PAs and IPAs will carbonate just fine with 2-3 wks in the bottle even after 6 days of cold crashing. If you cold crashed for longer, say, a month or 2 then I would be more concerned.

 

My 9.2% RIS took 2 months to fully carbonate in the bottle. 

 

It was around 8.5%.  So that could be it.  I'll cold crash for 5-6 days and try it out for the next one.

[davelew]

I'm going to chime in here as one who dislikes 1056.  If you want to brew a lager, brew a lager.  If you want to brew an ale, use an ale yeast with some character.  To me, 1056 is most useful for brewing a lager when my lagering freezer is broken, which is to say that it's not useful.

[MtnBrewer]

I'm going to chime in here as one who dislikes 1056.  If you want to brew a lager, brew a lager.  If you want to brew an ale, use an ale yeast with some character.  To me, 1056 is most useful for brewing a lager when my lagering freezer is broken, which is to say that it's not useful.

 

*crotch bump*

[positiveContact]

1056 haters.  who knew!?

 

I find it's a nice yeast in that it lets the hops and malt really shine.  it does not seem like a lager to me though.  while lager yeasts are clean they have some flavors that are unique to them that ale yeasts don't seem to have.

[denny]

I'm going to chime in here as one who dislikes 1056.  If you want to brew a lager, brew a lager.  If you want to brew an ale, use an ale yeast with some character.  To me, 1056 is most useful for brewing a lager when my lagering freezer is broken, which is to say that it's not useful.

 

Why?  Is there only one style of ale that we should all be brewing?  I want the hops and malt to dominate my ales, not the yeast.  Why should I not do that?  I mean, I'm not trying to tell you that your ales won't be any good without 1056.  You have every right to dislike using it for what you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to be bound by that.

[positiveContact]

 

Why?  Is there only one style of ale that we should all be brewing?  I want the hops and malt to dominate my ales, not the yeast.  Why should I not do that?  I mean, I'm not trying to tell you that your ales won't be any good without 1056.  You have every right to dislike using it for what you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to be bound by that.

 

I'm feeling inspired to get some 1056 in the future

[davelew]

 

Why?  Is there only one style of ale that we should all be brewing?  I want the hops and malt to dominate my ales, not the yeast.  Why should I not do that?  I mean, I'm not trying to tell you that your ales won't be any good without 1056.  You have every right to dislike using it for what you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to be bound by that.

 

My experience is that I can get hops and malt to dominate lagers better than 1056.  I think I can get maltier profiles from certain English ale yeasts like 1028, 1084, 1098.  For my palate and my brewing setup (where lagers aren't much trouble), I have trouble imagining a situation where 1056 is the best choice.

[positiveContact]

 

My experience is that I can get hops and malt to dominate lagers better than 1056.  I think I can get maltier profiles from certain English ale yeasts like 1028, 1084, 1098.  For my palate and my brewing setup (where lagers aren't much trouble), I have trouble imagining a situation where 1056 is the best choice.

 

I feel pretty confident that 1056 would taste better in an APA than a lager yeast.  the lager yeasts I've used all make beer that tastes like a lager.  1056 beer does not taste like a lager.

[denny]

 

I feel pretty confident that 1056 would taste better in an APA than a lager yeast.  the lager yeasts I've used all make beer that tastes like a lager.  1056 beer does not taste like a lager.

 

Indeed.  I kept wondering how 1056 equates to lagers.

[positiveContact]

 

Indeed.  I kept wondering how 1056 equates to lagers.

 

I think it's the "clean" thing.  I dunno.

[denny]

 

I think it's the "clean" thing.  I dunno.

 

1056 and lager yeasts are both "clean", but I don't get a lot of the same "clean" out of them.  They each have their own way of being "clean".

[StankDelicious]

 

1056 and lager yeasts are both "clean", but I don't get a lot of the same "clean" out of them.  They each have their own way of being "clean".

Ignore the unclean unbelievers, Denny.

[positiveContact]

i have no problem someone not liking 1056 but saying you can get something better with a lager yeast or english ale yeast is odd.  it's up to personal preference and it's not about these other yeasts being "better" at something.  they all bring different tastes to the table.

Edited by TheGuv, 17 June 2013 - 05:05 PM.

[Genesee Ted]

It is also odd that people take 2 to 3 weeks to ferment out and months to bottle condition.  Seems to me that many of us need to take a closer look at our pitch rates and nutrient and oxygen additions.  

[Clintama]

I know why mine takes that long to ferment and it's completely due to the low temperature. I'm in no hurry and I end up with clean beer. If I could easily ferment in the mid 60's I would, but this works okay for me.

[neddles]

It is also odd that people take 2 to 3 weeks to ferment out and months to bottle condition. 

...was function of the low ferm. temp he chose and not O2 or nutrients. 

 

 

...and months to bottle condition.

 

...was a function of high ABV.

[djinkc]

1056 et al is a nice yeast IMO.  Yeah, clean to the point of almost being "1010 soulless".  Honestly, I had not used it for a few years until our club had a little contest for one of our annual parties.  The yeast was required for the contest so I of course did a run with it for multiple brews. 

 

OTOH, at the home brew level, I don't think I want it or anything else to ferment an APA or AIPA in 5 days.  I could do it but that would tax my system to maintain the temps I want.  Basser, I'll send you a few anytime if you want to critique mine.

[davelew]

 

1056 and lager yeasts are both "clean", but I don't get a lot of the same "clean" out of them.  They each have their own way of being "clean".

 

This is a better way of what I was trying to say.  1056 and lager yeasts have different "clean" flavors (and different lager yeasts have slight differences as well), and I prefer the lager versions.