Author: Marshall Schott
It was over 2 years ago now I heard about a new dry yeast strain purported to ferment fast, clean, and drop clear quickly all while imparting some yeast character. Resembling many traits of the yeast I’d recently developed a love for, WLP090 San Diego Super Yeast, I was excited about the prospect of having a dry equivalent handy for those unplanned brew days, something that would produce a beer with more character than the all-too-convenient Safale US-05 strain. Back in February 2013, I split a 10 gallon batch of my Brown Ale and fermented half with BRY-97 while WLP002 English Ale Yeast was pitched into the other. You can read about all the details of that process and those (anecdotal) results over at HomeBrewTalk, suffice it to say the beers seemed to taste different to friends and me. The most poignant recollection I have about that experiment is how incredibly long it took for the BRY-97 batch to show signs of active fermentation, an observation validated by the experiences of many other homebrewers.
The following June, Rebel Brewer conducted a fantastic experiment where they compared 4 different American ale yeasts in a split-batch of the same Session IPA– WLP001 vs. Safale US-05 vs. Mangrove Jack’s M44 vs. Danstar BRY-97. Similar to my experiment, they noted the BRY-97 batch appeared to lag a bit longer than the others, showing only minimal signs of fermentation activity 24 hours post-pitch, at which point the other 3 were at high krausen. While fermentation lasted slightly longer on the BRY-97 batch, attenuation was noted to be similar to the other strains, reaching the same FG as both WLP001 and M44. Finally, it would appear the beer fermented with BRY-97 was the least enjoyed of the 4, with one taster noting diacetyl, while the US-05 fared much better. Read the blog post to see which yeast was the favorite!
As much as I appreciate side-by-side comparisons, I remained curious just how different BRY-97 really was from other popular clean fermenting strains, so I designed a proper xBmt comparing it to the ubiquitous Safale US-05.
| PURPOSE |
To evaluate the general distinguishability of 2 beers produced from a split-batch of the same wort and each fermented with a different yeast strain– Danstar BRY-97 and Safale US-05.
| METHODS |
What makes dry yeast so convenient to me, even more than the fact it usually costs slightly less than liquid varieties, is the fact it doesn’t require the making of a starter, which consequently makes spur-of-the-moment brew days more possible. That’s exactly what this was! I woke up real early one Sunday morning and couldn’t get back to sleep, so rather than lie around obsessing about it and fidgeting 
to the point of waking my wife, I threw together a very simple single-hop APA recipe (pic below) and was mashed-in within the hour. Thanks to BeerSmith, I hit my target mash temperature of 150°F on the nose where it remained throughout a 45 minute saccharification rest before being collected in my boil kettle where it met a FWH charge of Mosaic hops.
As the wort was boiling, I cleaned my MLT, got the yeast out of cold storage, and measured out the rest of the boil hops.
With the boil complete, I used my Hydra IC to rapidly chill the wort to my target fermentation temperature of 66°F.
Despite the results from the rehydration xBmt, I still choose to prepare my dry yeast in this manner because it’s super easy and provides me some sense of security I’m not murdering half the cells in the pack. Cheap insurance.
I’ve been having great success rehydrating for about 15 minutes in 75°F to 90°F… here it comes… tap water. Plain old, unsantized, non-boiled water straight from my kitchen faucet. If your water is shit, please don’t do this, it’s certainly not “best practice.” The US-05 slurry was a creamy white while the BRY-97 slurry looked much browner in comparison. They were pitched into their respective carboys that were sitting in my cool ferm chamber.
In my experience, dry yeast usually takes a bit more time to show signs of activity when compared to liquid yeasts, particularly when using a starter. This wasn’t the case at all for these beers, as the US-05 batch had developed a hearty krausen after only 8 hours.
Despite BRY-97’s reputation as being a very slow starter, that batch was kicking along just fine at 20 hours post-pitch.
By 36 hours into fermentation, the beers looked very similar.
High krausen for both seemed to occur right around the 3 day mark, with the BRY-97 batch fermenting with such vigor that it created a slight mess. This is when I ramped the temp to encourage complete attenuation.
I took an initial hydrometer reading at 6 days into fermentation, the point at which the krausen on each batch had completely dropped and airlocks were no longer bubbling.
A difference of about .001 SG, not too shabby. I let the beers sit another couple days before measuring the FG again, when it confirmed the first I proceeded to cold crash, fine with gelatin, and package.
They were carbonated and ready for sampling just a few days later. One difference was clear right off the get-go.
| RESULTS |
Over the span of 12 days, 15 people participated in this xBmt including BJCP provisional judges, a professional brewer, experienced homebrewers, and longtime craft beer nerds. Each taster was blindly served 3 samples, 2 fermented with US-05 and 1 fermented with BRY-97, then asked to select the one they believed was different from the others. While 9 (p<0.05) participants would have had to correctly identify the BRY-97 beer as being different to imply significance, only 6 were capable of doing so.
Following the initial triangle test, the nature of the xBmt was revealed to participants and they were asked to complete a second triangle test. The results were exactly the same, no one changed their mind.
Of the 6 participants who correctly identified the different sample in the first triangle test, 3 reported preferring the beer fermented with BRY-97, 2 preferred the US-05 beer, and 1 person apparently forgot to answer. When asked to identify the beer they believed was fermented with BRY-97, 3 chose correctly while the other 3 endorsed I have no clue.
My Impressions: When served these beers 4 times in opaque cups by friends who not only randomized their order but changed which beer was the odd-one-out, I was accurate a single time, less than what we might expect if my selection random chance. Did I notice a difference in flavor, aroma, or mouthfeel? Absolutely! At least when I was drinking from clear glasses that I served myself. And in these moments, my preference swung slightly toward the beer fermented with US-05… because it was prettier.
| DISCUSSION |
To me, yeast is one of the more interesting aspects of brewing, I’m always stoked to do these types of comparisons. While these results would suggest the distinguishable differences between US-05 and BRY-97 weren’t all that drastic, the truth of the matter is they were different.
There’s no denying it– the fact these beers were fermented with different yeasts made them different beers. This xBmt supports the idea that 2 notably clean dry ale yeasts, US-05 and BRY-97, have similar enough characteristics that many drinkers will likely be unable to distinguish 2 beers fermented with either strain. That’s it. It doesn’t prove they’re the same strain, it doesn’t prove they perform the same, it doesn’t prove anything. That being said…
Results like these leave me comfortable accepting I can probably get away with substitutions if, for example, my local shop sells one strain and not the other. Perhaps you’ve been dying to make a homebrew version of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale but the shop you frequent is out of US-05, I’ve absolutely no qualms recommending replacing it with BRY-97, chances are the resultant beer will turn out pretty damn similar.
I’m curious how others have experienced Danstar BRY-97 West Coast Ale yeast. Did you experience a nail-bitingly long lag? Was the attenuation what you expected? How did it compare to other yeasts you’ve used. Please share your thoughts in the comments section below. Cheers!
Support Brülosophy In Style!
All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!
Follow Brülosophy on:
FACEBOOK | TWITTER | INSTAGRAM
| Read More |
18 Ideas to Help Simplify Your Brew Day
7 Considerations for Making Better Homebrew
List of completed exBEERiments
How-to: Harvest yeast from starters
How-to: Make a lager in less than a month
| Good Deals |
Brand New 5 gallon ball lock kegs discounted to $75 at Adventures in Homebrewing
ThermoWorks Super-Fast Pocket Thermometer On Sale for $19 – $10 discount
Sale and Clearance Items at MoreBeer.com
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!
43 thoughts on “exBEERiment | Yeast Comparison: Safale US-05 vs. Danstar BRY-97 In An American Pale Ale”
Hi!
BRY-97 is my favorite dry yeast. Ive brewed IPA, Brown Ales, Pales with it. I never had ferm problems/issues with it. Always o2/nutrients/whirlfloc my worts. Fermenting 16-18oC range. Absolute fan of this yeast.
Martin
Hi, I also love Bry-97, it is my go to dry yeast. I do experience a long lag (usually 36 hours or so), but I find it gives me the cleanest flavor.
I used Bry97 back in February on a low gravity APA and it did take forever to take off, making me very nervous. I waited almost 2 days to start my black box profile. Beer turned out fine and I would use that yeast again knowing the lag is somewhat “normal”
The one time I tried, I had a 52 hour lag phase and then several days of sulfury beer after I kegged it. The sulfur faded and the beer tasted pretty good. Still, that lag phase… It might be a while before I try BRY-97 again.
I have used BRY-97 once and like others it had a loong lag time, around 3 days if I remember correctly. The beer turned out just fine, flavor and attenuation, but I have not used it since if only because it extends my turnaround time that much more.
I tried BRY-97 a couple of months ago – funnily enough also in a Mosaic Pale – and you’re right, the differences between it and US-05 are small verging on insignificant. The one thing I seem to recall was that the BRY-97 seems to leave a much denser, rockier yeast cake in the bottom of the fermenter – I didn’t like it (for no very good reason, I admit – it just makes reusing the slurry a tad more of a hassle.)
I’m going to mirror what most people have said about BRY-97. I used it once in an IPA and definitely experienced a long lag period (rehydrated pitch). However once it took off it really want hard. The beer turned out great. I would say the hop flavors were slightly muted conpared to us-05. I mostly use dry yeast because of the convenience and I have been having good results.
muted hops. hmmm. don’t remember 1st gen, am on 3rd gen in 2 instances, and all the batches i can remember started w/in 6 hrs. the last had krousen and co2 production in 2hrs. what is noticeable, from the first generation, is that my favorite nw hops, prized for their citrusy characteristics are all but gone in presentation. they taste the same as junga, first gold, chinook, cascade, amarillo; they all aquire a muted, generic bitterness associated w/ early boil hops, but less so. very efficient ferment w/ some of the lowest FG i’ve ever had, but very un-remarkable in flavor and aroma. typical is OG1.070-80, FG1.010-12. efficient but tasteless. any suggestions for efficient AND true to character?
Could probably look – do the on-package instructions recommend a water starter or dry pitch?
Recently picked up a pack of this and will likely try it out within the next couple of weeks… Side note, when you re-hydrated your dry yeast, did you add any sugar, or simply use warm water?? Sounds like that could drastically improve the lag time, specifically for this yeast..
Just warm water.
The manufacturer (Fermentis at least) actually recommends that – re-hydrating it in plain warm water, as opposed to re-hydrating in sugar water or pitching directly in to wort.
I have used it once, and I didn’t experience the epic long lag times that a lot of others seem to. I also noticed that it didn’t seem to drop as clear as US-05 does, although that could be due to any number of variables, maybe it was just a higher level of chill haze or something. The resultant beer was fine, I had no issues with the yeast, but I have been in no hurry to use the yeast again, mainly because the shops that stock it are further away than the one that stocks the Fermentis range. The shop I get grains from stocks it but also all the Wyeast liquid varieties, so… In saying that though, if it was all I could get I’d have no problem using it again. 🙂
In your experiments you often note “They were carbonated and ready for sampling just a few days later.”. I am now wondering if you don’t let your beer sit for a few weeks? You don’t “lager” it?
How many day’s usually pass after the fermentation is done until you drink the beer?
Fining with gelatin and carbonating the way I do, it is usually “ready” a few days later, though it often sits in my keezer for 5-10 days before I start doling out the samples to participants.
That is an interessting approach. Here in Europe all of the brewers I know lager their beer for at least 3-4 weeks after the fermentation is done. If they do lager-beers even longer.
I need to give your approach a try. Maybe this would be another interessting appraoch for one of your experiments… 😉
Thanks for your blog, I love learning from you.
I’ve never used BRY-97, but I’ve used US-05 and S-04 and sometimes I have this questions… How different these yeasts are?? I’ve brewed an APA with citra dry-hopping and S-04 and it was probably one of my best beers (it supposed that US-05 would be better, but S-04 was perfect!). So, if you can’t buy your habitual yeast… try with other!! 🙂
Cheers!
You think you could provide a quick post on your re-hydrating procedure? I loved your starter process that I now use it for all batches.
Hmm, that’d probably be a pretty boring post, I just do what the package recommends: sprinkle dry yeast on warm water, let ‘er sit for 15 minutes, swirl, pitch. Were you thinking of something else?
I guess I thought there was more to it since you mentioned getting yeast from cold storage but that was just the yeast packet I assume. So no need for a separate post. Thanks for the continued Exbeeriments… thoroughly enjoying.
Ahh, yeah, I keep my dry yeast sachets in a small freezer, take them about an hour or so before rehydrating. Cheers!
This has got me interested to try BRY- 97 again. Use US 05 on a pale that’s which I tend to brew every third or fourth batch.
Bought 2 pouches of BRY 97 for this beer and the first batch I used it on tasted off somehow.
A few things weren’t perfect in brewing from memory.
Drinkable enough but had an off flavour a (sulphury perhaps?) that was noticeable.
Had always half suspected a bad batch and half suspected the yeast.
Never happened again so just blamed the yeast.
Think you’ve convinced me that poor practise may have given the BRY 97 a bad rap in my mind.
Time to use the other sachet.
I learned yesterday from somebody far smarter than me that BRY-97 is the same strain as WLP051 California Ale V Yeast, aka Anchor Liberty, which I almost always have to let lager for a bit to reduce sulfur. While I don’t get sulfur from BRY-97, it’s possibly a normal component of this strain.
I’d always heard that US 05 and BRY 97 were the same strain which is why I was so surprised at my experience of the difference between the two.
What you say about WLP051 makes a lot of sense though, as I saw them behave very differently in the fermenter and as I said taste was very different.
Possibly this is a belief based in the fact that they are touted by brew shops and in recipes so readily as equivalent for substitution with each other that someone on forums etc has told me?
Will be interesting to see if I get the same off tastes this time round as my kegging fridge and set up is big enough to lager a spare keg these days so I can leave her be and see if it cleans up.
Will give me something else to do til you post the next exbeeriment anyways.
I frequently don’t care if my batches are exactly the same every time, as long as they’re interesting and “close enough” that’s good enough for me. So, US-05 or BRY-97, it’s all good 🙂
Funny reading this in hindsight. I’m very new to homebrewing and randomly chose BRY-97 for my third brew. And, yes, it was a good 24hrs before it came to life – warming it up a bit seemed to do the trick but, having read this now, maybe it would have sprung to life around then anyway.
Great post. Am I correct when I see you are siphoning directly into your post on the keg instead of simply letting the line lay down into the keg? If so, do you have any problems at all with this approach? Thanks.
That’s right, I just started doing that and it has been working good, if but a bit slower.
Agree with chixxi, I find the very quick process from grain to glass surprising. I can’t figure out the exact timing from the write up as sampling takes place “a few days” after day 8. My own experience is that none of my beers >4.5% abv are ready that quickly. I think the fastest has been 14 days for a 4% beer but even that improved noticeably after a month conditioning at just under room temp in the bottle. Anything stored cold takes a heck of a lot longer to mature.
Do you have precise temp control and the ability to ramp ferment temps? Do you pitch healthy starters? Fine with gelatin? If so, you can turn beers around like I do.
Yes, I can and do use all those tricks and can certainly produce clear bottled beer in between one and two weeks. But it tastes green until it’s had a few weeks in the bottle. Perhaps one difference is that I’m priming with sugar and waiting for the beer to carbonate through secondary fermentation? I’m sure that’s a factor. However, I have noticed that flavour improves significantly for over a month. Could just be a placebo of course. Perhaps you do do a test with the exact same recipe brewed at two points in time and see if the beer given an extra month to mature actually tastes any different? If there is a significant difference, the “green beer” effect could be masking more subtle variations in your other exbts?
Now to read the dextrose starter article, looking forward to that as I sometimes use it myself.
agh.. meant “could do”, not “do do”.
One thing I never saw noted here is that Danstar recommends a pitch rate roughly twice that of US-05. I don’t know if you followed their recommendation or not. The price of 2 packs pretty much seals the deal for me. My experience (N=1, one packet) in 5.5 gal of 1.063 IPA was that the yeast took ~36hrs to get started. It attenuated as well as I would have expected from US-05 though it took a few days longer. I have gelled and not gelled a wide variety of beers and prefer not to in my hoppy beers as I note a significantly reduced hop character when I use it. For my BRY-97 IPA I did not use gelatin. The beer was fresh bright and wonderful for about the first 3-4 days in the keg but then the hops faded fast as the remainder of the yeast flocculated from the beer. The beer clarified at that point to the same degree I would expect from gelatin (crystal clear) and was still a solid beer but nowhere near what I was before it cleared. Hope this helps.
I have a 1.061 scottish ale in the carboy now with rehydrated bry97. lag was about 18 hrs but needed a blow off tube after about 30 hrs. Churned like it was boiling for a couple days and now has finally settled down so i got the airlock back on. temps on the upper limit.
To follow up, it finished @ 1.014 and was enjoyed by all
I have read that a lot of people on here have very long lag times with bry 97 I tried it for the first time last brew American pale ale I just rehydrated it in water 30 degrees Celsius as instructions say pitch into wort when temp of yeast and wort hit about 22 degrees as not to shock yeast and within 6hrs slight activity in airlock 18 hrs later it was bubbling harder than any yeast I’ve ever used lol finished ferment hit correct numbers in 5 days waited 3 more tested again then kegged , sampled beer 2 days later no off flavours at all great tasting beer at 2 days I can’t wait to start drinking it in 4 weeks as we all know it’s way better then , but best tasting green beer if made so far so at this stage very happy with this yeast but the true test will be in 4 weeks
Love reading and learning what everyone else on here is doing l always learn 👍
This XBment inspired me to go with BRY97 when my LHBS was out of S05. I didn’t have time to make a yeast starter, so it was my only option. The beer is a Galaxy IPA. I am interested to see how the beer comes out.
Just bottled a Rye Ale done with rehydrated Bry97. OG@1.072 and finished @1.018. Not bad attenuation(75%?) considering I didn’t use a bubbler or a starter.
Thanks for the posts. I have just googled this BRY-97 yeast because I’m 36 hours in since inoculation and nothing is apparent. I’m now reassured by the updates here and will be patient. I think my situation is causing a slow start for two reasons.
1. I am on the low side of room temperature. About 16C.
2. I pitched 11g of yeast into 24 litres which is just under the minimum advised on the pack.
thats about 6c below what i use. and i always do starter (1tblspn DME for every 200ml, 1/4 teaspoon fermax, cool, add yeast, agitate frequently 24-48hrs). proly the temp. no worries, takes longer, tastes cleaner im sure.
FWIW I was chatting on The Homebrew Network with a brewer that’s been brewing since the 1970s. When he started brewing he sent letters to commercial brewers, many now long-closed. His understanding is that BRY-97 is the Ballantine IPA strain. It is plausible to me that Ballantine banked the yeast at Siebel when they closed, and later Lallemand which owns Siebel released it.
Hi, good post, it really helped me calm down, I used DRY-97 on my last batch and it’s been about 72hs since I pitched it and no signs of fermentation, the temp is ~16C so I’ll wrap a couple of towels around the fermenter to raise the temp and give it a shake. Thanks!
Late to this one, I much prefer the flavour of BRY 97, to my palate it is incredibly clean, whereas US05 gives me unpleasant esters. I thought it was water chemistry, diacetyl, infection, but it turned out to be the yeast. I think it’s one of those situations where different people taste different things. Which makes me happy that we have options!