The rated attenuation of Wyeast 1469 is 67-71%. I’ve used it twice in 1.050 brews and both times went way over that: 83% and 81%. I’m going to use it this weekend in a 1.070 stout.
I’m curious what experience this community has had with respect to attenuation when using West Yorkshire…particularly what experience you’ve had in high-ish gravity beers.
[quote=“kcbeersnob”]The rated attenuation of Wyeast 1469 is 67-71%. I’ve used it twice in 1.050 brews and both times went way over that: 83% and 81%. I’m going to use it this weekend in a 1.070 stout.
I’m curious what experience this community has had with respect to attenuation when using West Yorkshire…particularly what experience you’ve had in high-ish gravity beers.[/quote]
I can’t comment on the West Yorkshire since I’ve only used it a couple times for average OG ales, but in general, with other yeasts I’ve found that the rated attenuation is subject to wide variations. I’ve made very high OG Burtons/Barleywines with yeasts which, if I depended on the attenuation data commonly attached to them, I wouldn’t have bothered with. In every case, they attenuated far beyond expectation. And being something of a madman when it comes to sanitation, I am as certain as anyone can be that the increased performance was not a result of wild yeasts or bugs working their way into the process.
So now, I pretty much pay no attention at all to such ratings (and for that matter, opinions I read), finding that as always, it’s just better to jump in and just try a strain (or procedure, or any other ingredient) and see how it winds up. Honestly, by adding some common sense into the mix I’ve never been disappointed by the result . Or maybe I’ve just been lucky. :mrgreen: .
Individual experimentation is the only way to find the real story and very often, you can stumble upon that brilliant result which would have never come about if you depend strictly on published data. Basically, any advice from a second or third party (including me) should always be taken with a grain of salt.
There are so many variables at play in brewing that one just has to discover what works in one’s own situation.
[quote=“The Professor”]
Individual experimentation is the only way to find the real story and very often, you can stumble upon that brilliant result which would have never come about if you depend strictly on published data. Basically, any advice from a second or third party (including me) should always be taken with a grain of salt.
There are so many variables at play in brewing that one just has to discover what works in one’s own situation.[/quote]
Agreed.
I used to experiment a lot with different strains, but lately I’ve been using just a few strains. I’ve found that quite informative. For example, I’ve learned that given my typical processes and equipment, I generally reach 82-86% when using 1056 and it typically takes only a week for the krausen to fall. With 1272 I typically get 80-84% and it takes 12-14 days for the krausen to fall. I’ve actually adjusted the range in Beersmith using these numbers, so I can better predict FG. I’m finding my actual FG is much closer to the predicted number than it used to be.
I’ve really liked 1469 in the bitters I’ve done and I’m excited to try it in a stout. I should probably be doing an oatmeal stout given the ester production, but I’m writing my own rules. 
I have used this in some stronger beers (1.060-70) and it always finished out nice and dry. The yeast does take a while to drop, but the beers were usually clear after a couple of weeks in the keg or bottle. I have mainly used it in standard gravity bitters. I have also used it in a porter and thought it worked well with a dark beer. This is a nice all around strain.
I agree. It is fun to try new yeast strains. I often buy one tried and true yeast and one new strain and split the batch. Sometimes you can find someone to brew with that will be happy to try a new strain and help you with the cost of the batch.
