CML yeast recommendation

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
In fairness, you could do all of that with a single £2 sachet of brewery quality dried yeast as well.
If that exists yes. 2 quid sachet of brewery quality yeast sounds a bit unlikely to me. Depends what we mean by brewery quality I guess.
 
The CML website now has a section called “what to expect” next to most of their yeasts.

Ie, Hell - similar to S33, Atlantic - similar to S05 but with a rounder pallet etc.
I looked at that to compile the list above. It doesn't have a yeast comparison for every CML yeast, and I wondered what people had found from using the yeasts.
 
Will 1 packet be enough for 23l or is it best to add a bit extra from another packet and store till next brew day?
I've never used more than a single packet in any beer up to 27 litres. I always rehydrate my yeast, but even if I didn't I'd still use a single packet.
A 10 or 11 gram packet is designed to be sufficient for a "standard" (in homebrew terms) 5 gallon brew.
Since I then pitch another 3 or 4 brews from the first crop of yeast it really is cheap.
 
CML yeast are brilliant.
I like Midland (for Nottingham flavour) to start and four after a couple of days, to get the flocculation power, to stick the last few bits to the bottom of the bottle.
 
Hi folks. I'm wondering about getting some CML yeasts that match the big brands and wonder if you can confirm from experience which of these have close matches...

S-04 - Four?
US-05 - Five?
Lalbrew New England - none?
S-23 - Hell?
K-97 - Hog Norsk?
T-58 - Flushed Nun?

Maybe we need a table that matches CML yeasts to similar Lallemand and Fermentis yeasts? Can you help out above or below?

S-33 - House
BE-134 -
BE-256 -
W34/70 - Hell-ish?
S-189 - None?
WB-06 - Gretel? both diastatic

Lalbrew:
Nottingham - Midland
Abbaye
Belle Saison - Wallonia???
Wit -
Koln Kolsch -
Diamond - Hell
London -
Munich Classic -
Windsor - The Firm
Verdant - Clipper


Good idea. I feel a pdf coming on. I might have a cunning plan 🤔

https://www.crossmyloofbrew.co.uk/yeast-specs
 
I'm particularly interested in opinions on any of these:
  • CML version of Lalbrew New England?
  • CML version of K-97?
  • CML version of T-58?
  • Best CML for hoppy pales
  • Best CML for bitters?
  • Best CML kolsch style yeast?
Unless the beer style has developed to showcase the yeast strain, I prefer the yeast to take a back seat. I got very fed up with S-04 a while ago, although I hear it's improved since, but CML Four is OK. I used their Ale strain in a cheapo, use-up beer a while ago and was very pleasantly surprised. It's my goto for bitters and pale ales at the moment. I've just ordered a few more sachets.
I'm using CML Five in all my hoppy beers. I really should experiment more with the likes of Pia. By hoppy beers, I mean hoppy, summer, pale ales not the super-dreadnoughts of the American persuasion, although my interpretation of 8-Arch Corbel also relies on Five.
 
Last edited:
I'm particularly interested in opinions on any of these:
  • CML version of Lalbrew New England?
  • CML version of K-97?
  • CML version of T-58?
  • Best CML for hoppy pales
  • Best CML for bitters?
  • Best CML kolsch style yeast?
Their basic range (ie not the Beirm ones) has a kolsch yeast that I used a few times but not since about 2019. I remember it being good but don’t have much more info I’m afraid.
 
Their basic range (ie not the Beirm ones) has a kolsch yeast that I used a few times but not since about 2019. I remember it being good but don’t have much more info I’m afraid.
I have used the Kolsch yeast from their basic range quite a few times, and can highly recommend it. A little bird told me it might be repackaged Colonia f yeast.
 
I used the kolsch yeast once or twice, a few years ago. and it was pretty good. I suspect that other CML yeasts are suitable for kolsch type beers. Hog Norsk maybe? Kentucky? California Common? And what about Haze? I made one beer with Kentucky and didn't like the beer.

Unless the beer style has developed to showcase the yeast strain, I prefer to yeast to take a back seat. I got very fed up with S-04 a while ago, although I hear it's improved since, but CML Four is OK. I used their Ale strain in a cheapo, use-up beer a while ago and was very pleasantly surprised. it's my goto for bitters and pale ales at the moment. I've just ordered a few more sachets.
I'm using CML Five in all my hoppy beers. I really should experiment more with the likes of Pia. By hoppy beers, I mean hoppy summer pale ales not the super-dreadnoughts of the American persuasion, although my interpretation of 8-Arch Corbel also relies on Five.
As the years have passed I have focused more on the yeast in my beers. Yeast choice and fermentation influences beer a hell of a lot. I also like yeast forward styles. And favourite styles like bitter vary a huge amount with the yeast chosen. I don't just want the yeast to get out of the way. I actually think it's the best bit. even a 'neutral' yeast determines the malt and hop profile of the beer and it can vary enormously.

The CML yeast specs say that both Five and Atlantic are similar to US-05. And Pia is another popular option for hoppy pales. Midland, Haze, Beoir and Clipper too, I think! It's a big range that CML does. Could Atlantic be a Bry-97 clone? What are Haze and Beoir similar to? I doubt CML's supplier is finding new strains to clone that haven't been released by the big manufacturers, at some point at least.

P.S. ....
Pre industrialisation, brewers pitched fresh yeast into their beers. Many breweries do now, using yeast from the latest batch. Many breweries use dry yeast, but it's not the same thing. It's not wrong, of course, just different. I use fresh yeast and dried yeast. Dried yeasts generally lose character in the drying process. They behave differently. If you split a batch between US-05 and WLP001, the beers are different. 001 produces a richer malt profile. Not better - but different. I use liquid yeasts for saison because I don't get the same results from dried saison yeasts. not wrong or bad, I just like the ;liquid ones I've used. I think that dried yeast tends to improve when it is repitched as a fresh yeast. I read that "brewers make wort and yeast makes beer" years ago and I increasingly understand that. I would prefer to make extract beer and spend money and time on yeast than make AG beer and give little attention to yeast and fermentation. But I can't afford to use lots of extract! Grain is so much cheaper. I steal yeasts from bottled beers sometimes too. You can also get cask dregs from a pub if you ask nicely. Some breweries will happily give you some of their yeast. Don't push yeast out of the way, go and look for it, bring it home, look after it and get to know it! It doesn't require a lot of time. The time consuming aspects of brewing lie in making wort, cleaning, bottling, kegging, working out what to brew etc. Yeast starters take minutes. Yeast can be free.

I'm in my 60s and I suspect I will end up making extract/partial mash beers, adding hops, and focusing mostly on yeast and fermentation. Reduce the workload and spend the time on the key part, the interesting part, for me. I'm even intending sourcing yeasts from wild sources, fruits and flowers. My years of experimentation have led me to believe that you can make top quality beer with extract, though it will be optimised by using a small amount of grain at least, and adding hop leaf/pellets, if it's hopped extract, where hops are a key character in the beer.
 
Last edited:
As the years have passed I have focused more on the yeast in my beers. Yeast choice and fermentation influences beer a hell of a lot. I also like yeast forward styles. And favourite styles like bitter vary a huge amount with the yeast chosen. I don't just want the yeast to get out of the way. I actually think it's the best bit. even a 'neutral' yeast determines the malt and hop profile of the beer and it can vary enormously.
I've followed your investigations into yeast elsewhere and it's certainly made me think. I wonder whether you bottle or keg. While I'm (or was) perfectly happy to go to a beer festival and thoroughly enjoy most of the offerings from cask, I find that some of the more flavoursome yeasts don't suit bottling. Either, they continue to ferment very slowly resulting in overprimed bottles (and these are not diastaticus varieties, nor have I got an infection or it would be the same with all my yeasts) or, after they've been kept longer than they should, they develop a phenolic flavour which I seem to be particularly sensitive to.
I wonder whether "bitter" shouldn't be reserved for cask or filtered/pasteurised keg ales, and the bottled versions should be considered "pale ales" like in the old days. I can well imagine that some yeasts have developed that will nearly ferment out, but slow right down towards the end and that these are prized by cask brewers as the beer will stay in condition a little bit longer. Just my thoughts.
While it's off topic, I've got a fridge full of liquid yeasts including West Yorks and RIngwood that I really ought to get on and use before they go beyond resurrection. Trouble is, I tend to find a yeast I like and use it forever: The WhiteLabs French Ale WLP072 and the Wyeast Scottish 1728, I've kept going for years. The first one hasn't been around for a number of years and I'm glad I kept a dozen bottles of my first generation beer to grow it from.
 
I’m pretty sure their California Common is the same as MJ M54. I haven’t done any direct comparisons and have used both at different times and got the same results. Great for fermenting a good clean lager at 19 degrees.
 
Back
Top