exBEERiment | Yeast Comparison: Saflager W-34/70 vs. WLP029 German Ale In A Märzen

Author: Marshall Schott


When it comes to lager beer, opinions abound as to how these classic styles should be brewed. To the ultra traditionalist,  a “genuine” lager goes through multiple decoctions using only the finest regional malts, gets fermented cool with a conventional lager yeast strain, and is left to cold condition for months in order to produce a clean, crisp, clear beer. Unfortunately, it’s these axioms that I believe have made lager beer brewing intimidating to the point of avoidance by many homebrewers. Consider that in a recent survey of over 2,000 homebrewers, more than 58% reported they don’t make lager beer, which I find hard to believe is purely a function of a preference for only ale. Truthfully, I know folks who more or less abide by these traditional rules and they’re making fantastic beer! My first few lager batches were made using many conventional techniques and they came out great, so good in fact I wanted to make more, a lot more, but I resisted because of the time commitment. I wasn’t interested in tying up a fermentation chamber for 6-8 weeks and began to wonder how I might hasten the process. Driven by a combination of impatience and a love for delicious Pils, Märzen, Vienna, I began messing around with different, arguably heretical methods that would reduce overall grain-to-glass time. The first product of this experimentation involved using traditional lager yeast in conjunction with an adapted fermentation schedule, which reduced grain-to-glass time to approximately 4 weeks and in anecdotal trials produced beer of the same quality as those I’d made using longer fermentation schedules. Awesome! Only thing is, this method still required building up a large starter or pitching multiple sachets of yeast, which sucks financially-speaking, and it did take about 2 weeks longer than my typical ale turnaround time. Back to the drawing board I went.

It had to be about 4 years ago I was chatting with someone who won an award in a BJCP competition for an Oktoberfest he fermented with Nottingham ale yeast. This didn’t seem right to me at the time, incongruous with my ideas of what an Oktoberfest was or should taste like. But hell, the dude won an award for his mock lager beer, who was I to judge? Around the same time, I’d gotten into White Labs’ WLP029 German Ale/Kölsch yeast and had used it for a number of styles including American Pale Ale and even an American Wheat. I really liked how this strain seemed to emphasize malt character while also contributing positively to hop expression in hoppier styles. For fun one time, and to test a little theory I’d developed, I decided to ferment this yeast cooler than White Labs recommends at 58°F. The beer was my (m)Oktoberfest, it was ready for consumption 2 weeks after brew day, and it went on to win 1st place for the category in a local BJCP competition just a couple weeks later.

While the win was validating, I still wondered the extent to which this ale yeast differed in character from a traditional lager strain. Armed presently with 2 independently controlled fermentation chambers, the time finally came for me to mount this bad boy!

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between a lager beer fermented with a traditional lager yeast and the same beer fermented with a hybrid ale yeast.

| METHOD |

A couple days prior to brewing, I made a starter large enough to ferment 5 gallons of (m)Oktoberfest, leaving enough for me to steal a few pitches for later use.

01_3470vs029_starters
Click pic for review of Yeastir

While I usually mash this beer at 152°F, I’d been wanting to mess around with drying it out a bit more and chose to mash instead closer to 148°F.

Click pic for review of ThermaPen
Click pic for review of ThermaPen

I used the batch sparge method for this 10 gallon batch and was rather pleased with the color of the first runnings.

03_3470vs029_runoff

Once the entire volume of wort was collected and in the kettle, I brought it to a boil, making sure to add a few drops of FermCap-S to avoid a messy brew day disaster.

04_3470vs029_boil

Hops added and boil complete, I quickly chilled the wort to 60°F, just a few degrees above my currently frigid groundwater.

Click pic for review of The Hydra IC
Click pic for review of The Hydra IC

The wort was split into two 6 gallon PET carboys and 1 was placed in a chamber set to my 05_3470vs029_3470jarpreferred hybrid fermentation temperature of 58°F while the other was placed in a different chamber set to my preferred lager fermentation temperature of 50°F. While the hybrid batch was at temp a few hours sooner, I waited for the traditional batch to reach target temp before pitching yeast, as I wanted to observe the progression of each within the same time-frame. This only took a few hours. The next step was pitching the yeast. The hybrid batch was hit with a starter of previously harvested WLP029 while I pitched some Saflager 34/70 slurry that had previously fermented a German Pils in the traditional batch.

With the temp controllers set, I went out of town for a couple days and returned to 2 actively fermenting Märzens, the hybrid beer appearing to be a bit further along compared to the traditional yeast batch.

07_3470vs029_ferm2days

At 5 days post-pitch, the hybrid beer was showing dwindling signs of fermentation while the batch fermented with 34/70 was chugging along. In accordance with my preferred lager fermentation method, I began ramping the temp of the traditional yeast batch.08_3470vs029_ferm5daysTen days into fermentation, both beers were sitting at 68°F and had develop rather similar looking caps of krausen.

09_3470vs029_ferm10days

Fermentation appeared to have slowed significantly at this point and I took an initial gravity sample. My new precision FG hydrometer makes it appear as though the difference is stark, but in reality they were within about .002 points of each other.

Left: Hybrid (WLP029) | Right: Traditional (SafLager 34/70)
Left: Hybrid (WLP029) 1.012 | Right: Traditional (SafLager 34/70) 1.010

Since both beers were now at the same temp, I moved them to a single chamber and allowed them to sit for another 4 days before taking a second hydrometer measurement, then one more sample a day later for a confirmatory third reading.

11_3470vs029_SG2wks
Left: Hybrid (WLP029) 1.011 | Right: Traditional (SafLager 34/70) 1.010

The hybrid beer finished out at 1.011 while the traditional beer was just a hair above 1.010, similar enough to say attenuation was about equal. I crashed the beers over a couple days, fined with gelatin, and kegged them up!

Click pic for review of the Sterile Siphon Starter
Click pic for review of the Sterile Siphon Starter

I began presenting these beers to participants approximately a week after packaging, at which point they were well carbonated and crystal clear.

13_3470vs029_glasses
Left: Hybrid (WLP029) | Traditional (SafLager 34/70)

| RESULTS |

Given the fact 17 people participated in this xBmt, 10 would have had to accurately select the odd-beer-out to reach statistical significance (p<0.05). Each taster, blind to the nature of the xBmt, was served 3 samples of beer marked with different colors, 2 of which were the beer fermented with the traditional lager strain (Saflager 34/70) and 1 was the beer fermented with the hybrid strain (WLP029). Overall, only 7 participants accurately chose the beer fermented with WLP029 as being different, which is only slightly better than chance. While it’s wholly possible these correct tasters truly detected differences between the beers, statistically, these results do not support the notion that Saflager 34/70 and WLP029 produce differences distinguishable by the general population, at least when used to ferment Märzen.

Giving the 7 participants who chose correctly the benefit of the doubt, I’ll share some of the more interesting data from the second comparative evaluation in which tasters are asked to compare only the 2 different beers, still unaware of the nature of the xBmt. I’d caution anyone against jumping to any conclusions based on the following data due to the fact this xBmt did not produce significant results.

AROMA
Only 1 taster perceived the aroma between the 2 beers to be exactly the same while the 6 others believe they were somewhat similar; 1 preferred the aroma of the beer fermented with 34/70, 5 preferred the hybrid fermented beer, and 1 taster had no preference.

FLAVOR
All 7 tasters perceived the flavor of the difference beers as being somewhat similar with 4 preferring the beer fermented with the traditional lager strain and 3 preferring the beer fermented with WLP029.

MOUTHFEEL
A small majority of the tasters, 4, perceived mouthfeel as being exactly the same between the different beers while the other 3 thought it was somewhat similar; of the latter 3, all reported preferring the mouthfeel of the beer fermented with Saflager 34/70.

Regarding overall preference, a striking 6 of the 7 tasters selected the beer fermented with the traditional lager strain as being the one they enjoyed more. Interestingly, when asked to guess which beer was fermented with the hybrid yeast following disclosure of the nature of the xBmt, 5 tasters incorrectly chose the beer fermented with the traditional yeast.

My Impressions: My bias worked in my favor on this one, as I was able to distinguish the odd-beer-out in multiple quasi-blind triangle tests. To me, the hybrid fermented beer was noticeably more malt-forward, the character from the Honey malt and Special B far more present when compared to the other sample. I experienced the 34/70 fermented beer as being somewhat crisper with slightly more hop character, cleaner on the palate, aromatically less intense, and just more, well, lager-y. This is one of those recipes I’ve spent a lot of time honing and I personally felt both batches came out rather well, I’m not sure I really have a preference for one or the other, but if forced to choose, I’d be inclined to stick with using WLP029, if only because it reduces the overall turnaround time by a week or two.

| DISCUSSION |

A quick glance at my lager recipes will reveal my obvious adoration for hybrid yeasts, particularly WLP029, to ferment traditional lager styles. Over the years, I’ve produced a number of well-received lagers using this strain, many of which have fared rather well in competition. Admittedly, my thinking was that this method would get me close enough, that any differences that were purely a function of the yeast might go unnoticed by judges as long as the beer was well made. So yeah, to this extent, these results have left me feeling a bit validated.

Still, I’m hesitant to accept anything as absolute based solely on these results and have many other similar xBmts planned comparing different strains in different lager styles. I’ve heard that White Labs has plans to start performing more genetic sequencing of their strains, I find this incredibly interesting and look forward to learning more about these microorganisms we all love so much.

One last thing…

I brewed a California Common for a recent xBmt comparing 2 yeast strains purported to be from the same source. In the results article for that xBmt, I pontificated a bit:

To me, California Common is one of the very few styles that doesn’t allow for much leeway in terms of ingredient choice. The grains used should impart a gorgeous copper-amber color that produces a dry yet flavorful beer with just a touch of creaminess in the mouthfeel. The hops absolutely must be Northern Brewer, it’s part of what makes a Cal Common a Cal Common. I get that people like to play with different hop varieties, I actually think it’s really fun myself, and a Cal Common wort with Cascade or Mosaic would probably be great… just don’t call it a Cal Common. Because it’s not. Northern Brewer hops are a quintessential component of this style of beer, without them, you’ve got something else.

I bring this up because I believe there are brewers out there who share this sentiment when it comes to traditional lager beer, namely that a lager isn’t a lager unless certain ingredients and processes are used. On this specific point we may disagree, but believe me when I say, I understand where you’re coming from. I recently saw the recipe for a commercial Cal Common, it was dry hopped with Cascade, I cringed a little. For now, I’m comfortable referring to my lager beers fermented with other-than-traditional lager yeasts as “real lager” so long as they taste like the style I intended them to be. Perhaps this will make others cringe, and that’s okay, I get it.

***I recently learned the German Pils I submitted to NHC will be advancing to the second round, relevant because it was fermented with a “sloppy slurry” of WLP029.***


Support Brülosophy In Style!

tshirts_all

All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!


Follow Brülosophy on:

FACEBOOK   |   TWITTER   |   INSTAGRAM


patreon_banner


| 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!

 

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

24 thoughts on “exBEERiment | Yeast Comparison: Saflager W-34/70 vs. WLP029 German Ale In A Märzen”

  1. I recently brewed your Munich Helles with 029. While it did produce a tasty beer I did notice slight fruityness/esters even though it was fermented cold. Have you detected this?

    1. Not necessarily. I’m compelled to believe your experience could potentially have been different if you didn’t know the beer was fermented with 029. Bias has a huge impact on perception. I absolutely plan to repeat this xBmt with my Helles. Cheers!

    2. Even some lager strains produce slight fruitiness/esters (like the Budvar-strain), but we don’t, because of that, consider them as not being lagers.

  2. Nice timing! I have been preparing to brew a baltic porter, and will split the batch to ferment with two different yeast strains. One will be a lager yeast, the other will be with WLP 029.

  3. This is pretty cool, and I need to encourage my homebrew club members to make more Mock Lager. (I should do it more myself, but as someone who only recently got lagering facilities, I’m probably going to stay traditional for the fun or it.)

    The big issue, for me, is not whether there’s a difference, but whether either had true lager character. I’ve used Scotish Ale yeast for my Homebrew Club’s Octoberfest party to make a pils style beer and it was the most well received at the party, but the big thing to me is not whether you can make a beer that scores 36 or 38, but whether you can nail the 45 using an ale yeast.

    1. Oops. Missed the last part about advancing in the NHC, which goes a long way to respond to my thoughts.

  4. Interesting experiment mate, a good read. 🙂

    I recently fermented a batch of my own Munich Helles style recipe, with US-05, at about 16C just to see what it was like compared to when I’ve done it with the usual W34/70. Honestly I couldn’t detect a whole lot of difference, it may be very slightly fruitier, but it doesn’t negatively affect the beer. It still tastes how I intended it to when I brewed it. Unfortunately I don’t have the means to do side by side beers to compare like this, but from my memory of the other versions, there’s hardly any difference.

    I probably won’t do it again, next in line are a few batches of BoPils, using your quick lager method. I’m happy with a 4 week turnaround, as I don’t drink enough to need to speed it up any more than that (apart from wanting to see how they taste of course!)

    Cheers!

      1. Ha ha, well it wasn’t exactly the same as it is when done with lager yeast but it’s very close. I’m guessing it’s the low ferment temp, giving a clean flavour allowing the malt and hops to come through.

      2. Sam Davies Talwar

        Hi Marshall, a good portion of NZ Pils are brewed with ale yeasts – often US05/WLP001 in the 15.5-16C range – you should totally give one a go if you haven’t already.

  5. Thank you again for pushing the envelope on what we think is and isn’t acceptable as far as lagers go in the homebrewing world. I’ve been able to produce some fine lagers using your modified-from-traditional techniques and have been so much happier not having to tie my gear up for months at a time. It’s truly been a breath of fresh air in the pipeline! This was a great read and certainly interesting to again challenge my thoughts on what can be done to shave even more time off the process! I look forward to future exbeeriments and will be keeping an eye here so long as you continue your efforts!

  6. Excellent experiment. I have been wanting to work on my lagers, but the temps and time have been limiting to me. I’m curious to find a few recipes and processes that could closely emulate the style and not tie up my ferment chamber for two months.

  7. As someone that purchased a chest freezer and temp controller JUST to make proper lagers, this whole experiment seems like blasphemy to me! How dare you make a lager without lager yeast. Next thing will be men marrying animals and beer will be made in microwaves.

    I will probably try the US-05 at 55F, though. Per manufacturer, 53.6F is the bottom.

    And Kit Lab only made it to 13% 🙁

  8. I recently produced a Miabock with WYeast 2575 Kolsch II. Fermented a 54 F until activity subsided (about 6 days) and then bumped it up to 65 F for about a week. After only 2 weeks bottle conditioning, it is a great example of a Maibock. Tasted side by side with commercial examples there is little appreciable difference. I plan to enter it into competition later this summer if I can make it last that long.

  9. I just pulled a pint of Gordan Strong’s Modern Oktoberfest recipe fermented with WLP029. My wife commented that it was even more lager like than the Vienna I have on tap that used wlp833. I am very impressed and glad that I tried using it as the turn around is a bit faster and the taste is delicious. Thanks!

  10. Great site!

    I have easy access to either of these yeasts, for myself the issue would be the temperature (only have a cold basement to work with). How would the W 34/70 compare at higher temps, say the quoted 58*?
    Would the 029 produce a better “lager” at that temp than the actual lager yeast?

    Thanks,

    1. Marshall Schott

      If only someone would perform another ferm temp xBmt comparing 34/70 fermented a cool and warm temps……… 🙂

      To answer you’re question– I’m not sure… yet.

      1. I think I am going to try it on a basic Vienna lager soon. I have room in my basement that has been getting down to about 55* with the door shut and the heat vents blocked. I think with a swamp cooler I might be able to keep the beer to ferment at maybe 57*?
        I’ll try the w 34/70 and see what I get. The temp issue has kept me from any attempts at a lager up until now, but your exbeeriments have given me a push to try it anyway.

      2. Marshall Schott

        This xBmt is planned for very near future.

        I guess Vinnie from Russian River always ferments his first pitch of 34/70 (their house lager strain) at ale temps in a Cal Common style beer, which people to enjoy a lot.

  11. This is a great experiment and really glad it worked out well. I had a few questions if you don’t mind!

    1) Was the temp on the WLP029 carboy ramped up after the first few days? In your experience is the D-rest necessary on the hybrids, if started at a colder temp like you did? Presumably if you ended up at 68 then the yeast effectively went through a D-rest.

    2) Any thoughts on pitch rate with the hybrid yeasts? Can you get away with a more traditional ale pitch rate like 1M/ml/P?

    Thanks!

    1. Marshall Schott

      1. Yes it was ramped. I’m not sure a d-rest is necessary, but I ramp anyways to hasten the attenuation process.

      2. I use ale pitch rates when using hybrid strains these days… but I don’t use hybrid strains much, as I prefer fermenting my lagers with 34/70 at ale temperatures 🙂

Let us know what you think!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sign up to be notified when we publish new content!

Thank you to our sponsors!

Brülosophy is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and other affiliated sites.
Scroll to Top