Hazy Yeast. What does it bring to the party?

[Tommo 2]

I've been thinking of making a batch of Pacific Ale from Stone & Wood. Here's the description from their website:
A hand-crafted pale ale from Stone and Wood in Byron Bay, Australia, Pacific Ale gets its name from the brewery's home next to the Pacific Ocean. Made with a combination of Australian barley and wheat this is a hazy, bready beer with juicy, fruity notes created by Galaxy hops.

I gather this is a low-bitterness beer with loads of late Galaxy, which might impart a certain haziness. Then I thought that maybe the yeast adds some character and is a low-floc variety so I thought CML Haze might be just the ticket. Here's the spec:
HAZE. US Ale Yeast.
Suitable to brew ales with low esters, leaving a slight haze.
Attenuation: 75%
Fermentation: ideally 15-20°C (59-68°F)
Flocculation: Low
Max ABV 9% in 20 litres- Pitching Rate: 50g/100 litres
INGREDIENTS:Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), emulsifier E49
What to expect? Similar US-05 but leaves a slight haze

My question is WHY? I understand that some beers- hefeweizen for example take their character from the yeast, which is often left in suspension, but what's the point of using a low-ester yeast which doesn't clear? If I'd used CML Five or US-05 and it didn't clear, I'd be sure there was something wrong with my process. I'm missing something here. Can anyone shed any light. Answers on a postcard, please.

"bready beer" is part of the description. That doesn't sound like US-05. Which yeasts leave a "bready" flavour apart from Allinson's Easy Bake?

For me be tempted to use WB 06 really good yeast

 

[An Ankoù]

For me be tempted to use WB 06 really good yeast

Thanks, but no. I'm going to use a Chico yeast. I've had a bit of a discussion on the Australia/NZ forum- not much, but enough to begin to get an inkling that most if the published recipes are going for the haze rather than the flavour. I reckon I've got it narrowed down now and I'm going to knock up a batch tomorrow. I think Galaxy has a characteristic which makes it particularly cloudy when used to excess so I'll rely on that for the haze.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

For me be tempted to use WB 06 really good yeast

Horrible yeast - certainly not one to use anywhere near expensive hops as it trashes hop flavour. As it seems to have originated at Duvel, it might have a place in Duvel-ish Belgian ales, but I certainly wouldn't use it in anything else.

 

[Pennine]

Thanks, but no. I'm going to use a Chico yeast. I've had a bit of a discussion on the Australia/NZ forum- not much, but enough to begin to get an inkling that most if the published recipes are going for the haze rather than the flavour. I reckon I've got it narrowed down now and I'm going to knock up a batch tomorrow. I think Galaxy has a characteristic which makes it particularly cloudy when used to excess so I'll rely on that for the haze.

US-05 is known for not being great at clarity especially with a large hop charge. I suspect this may be what they are referring to.

 

[Sadfield]

This is all mixed around for me, chickens and eggs.

Certain yeasts were selected for flavour, aroma and mouthfeel, it's the process that resulted in haze. Some yeasts accentuating that and now the haze element is just short hand for fruity yeasts that emphasise sweetness and a softness on the palate.

For example London Ale III will make hazy Neipas, but still perform as it was originally used, making pin bright English ales. Although, as @Northern_Brewer pointed out, that isn't the trend these days, largely I think due to craft brewers not using finings for two reasons. Inclusivity, making beers vegan friendly, and ditching an unnecessary process that has potential to strip out some flavour.

I wouldn't be supprised if it was a self-fulfilling prophecy and CML Haze was US05, but results in
hazey beer when bought by people wanting to brew hazey beer.

 

[prog99]

Are you brewing up a recipe for a beer you've never tried? It certainly doesn't look like a hazy beer in the pictures.

 

[An Ankoù]

Are you brewing up a recipe for a beer you've never tried? It certainly doesn't look like a hazy beer in the pictures.

Yes. I've never tried it, but it's described as hazy by the brewer. The ingredients list specifies malt, galaxy hops, yeast (I can't remember if water was actually specified). The description specifies barley and wheat only. So we've got barley malt and wheat malt. Many of the clone recipes call for rolled wheat and rolled oats! I think you can draw your own conclusions.
Hazy, in my understanding, is not the same as cloudy.

 

[Agentgonzo]

Hazy, in my understanding, is not the same as cloudy.

I completely agree with you. In every use of the word "hazy", it means a slight opacity that you can still see through. Everything, that is, except for "hazy IPA", means cloudy/murky/foggy. I would never have described a hefeweizen as "hazy". But now that NEIPA has co-opted the brewing scene, you can't use the word "hazy" in it's true meaning anymore without people going "that's not anywhere near cloudy enough".

It's almost as annoying as American brewers calling pale malt "2-row" despite almost every other type of malt/barley used in brewing being 2-row.

 

[Bzee]

The smoothie generation can handle cloudy beer

 

[An Ankoù]

Enough. We're getting seriously into the reams of whatiffery. I'm most convinced by the recipe on Brewer's Friend which uses pale malt 60.5%, wheat malt 37.2% and a bit of carapils 2.3%. Lightly bittered with galaxy and a shedload of galaxy in a dry-hop charge.
Time to put my money where my mouth is and get the bugggger brewed up- and see if it's hazy from the hops. Just had 400g of nice fresh (2022) galaxy arrive at £4 a 100g so I'm well chuffed. Will report back on all matters to do with haziness and keep air inclusion at packaging stage to a minimum (in a non-paranoid sort of way).
It's going on tomorrow morning as I've got two beers to bottle up first.

 

[An Ankoù]

I completely agree with you. In every use of the word "hazy", it means a slight opacity that you can still see through. Everything, that is, except for "hazy IPA", means cloudy/murky/foggy. I would never have described a hefeweizen as "hazy". But now that NEIPA has co-opted the brewing scene, you can't use the word "hazy" in it's true meaning anymore without people going "that's not anywhere near cloudy enough".

It's almost as annoying as American brewers calling pale malt "2-row" despite almost every other type of malt/barley used in brewing being 2-row.

I understand that a lot of American malt is 6-row, which has different characteristics to 2-row: better conversion, but more protein, I think. Perhaps the latter accounts for why adjuncts like rice and maize are so common in their industrial lagers (and the former allows them to do so). I use Château 2-row and 6-row pilsner malt. The latter has a slightly more grainy flavour which I like.

 

[clib]

I understand that a lot of American malt is 6-row, which has different characteristics to 2-row: better conversion, but more protein, I think. Perhaps the latter accounts for why adjuncts like rice and maize are so common in their industrial lagers (and the former allows them to do so). I use Château 2-row and 6-row pilsner malt. The latter has a slightly more grainy flavour which I like.

The Chateau base malts are really nice, but difficult to get hold of in the UK. The HBC did sell them, not sure if they still do.

 

[An Ankoù]

The Chateau base malts are really nice, but difficult to get hold of in the UK. The HBC did sell them, not sure if they still do.

Shane keeps a good range, but I don't think he stocks the 6-row. My favourite of their malts is their hook head lager, which will sub for MO low colour when times are desparate and has a surprisingly high extraction

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Haven't been in the UK for some time now (but only 6 years) and things must have changed a lot.

Yep, they have. I guess thinking back to some of the landmarks that allow me to date my memories of when things were changing - Cloudwater DIPA v3 was released in March 2016, Goat's Milk was Champion Beer of Britain in August 2017 (3.8% golden ale with oats - not hazy, but not long after that you started getting a lot more use of oats and things started going hazy), and by September 2019 Alworth is writing about juicy bitter by which time it had been a thing for a little while. So I'd say 2018, early 2019 was the year it really took off among cask beers.

Pacific Ale, I take it, is hazy from the massive charge of Galaxy. Haziness/cloudiness seems to have become an end in itself if oats are added to a recipe that shouldn't contain them and yeasts are developed which contribute nothing exceptional but haziness itself!

What happened was that the pioneers were looking for the best flavour regardless of appearance, and didn't care if it was hazy. But then that gets picked up on by the marketers, who encouraged their brewers to follow in the wake by using haze as a shorthand for the new juicy flavours. But it's not really an end in itself, the oats are still being added for mouthfeel. And there's no yeasts being developed only for haziness, but 1318 is prone to it which has established itself as a favourite yeast for flavour reasons (it's somewhat biotransformy, has the "right" esters etc).

I understand that a lot of American malt is 6-row

True, but the percentage is declining in malting as 2-row varieties suited to North America are developed. The advantages of 2-row are that it has slightly higher extract and is easier to malt as it's more uniform - squeezing 6 rows of grain into a head of barley means some are bigger than others, whereas geometry doesn't constrain 2 row in the same way. And Europeans would argue it tastes better, but USians would say that 6 row is just different, and they're used to the difference.* And it's a two-way thing, the higher protein content means more enzymes, so it's more diastatic so can handle large amounts of adjunct like maize/rice - but you need the adjuncts to dilute the higher protein content to reduce chill haze.

So that's why the US craft movement specifies 2-row, and 2-row is the norm among US "craft" beers, whereas US macro lager is generally 6-row.

In Europe, 6-row is generally only used for animal feed as the yields can be higher.

* Brulosophy's experience is here :
https://brulosophy.com/2018/04/09/g...-malt-vs-6-row-pale-malt-exbeeriment-results/The 12 participants who made the accurate selection on the triangle test were instructed to complete a brief preference survey comparing only the beers that were different. Preference was split right down the middle with both the 2-row and 6-row beers garnering the preference of 4 tasters each. Another 3 tasters reported having no preference despite noticing a difference while 1 person said they perceived no difference between the beers.

My Impressions: I was consistently and confidently able to identify the odd-beer-out over a series of semi-blind triangle tests. To my biased palate, the beer made with 2-row was very flavorful with a rich malty sweetness while the 6-row beer had what I perceived as an almost dirty character, it wasn’t bad per se, just not quite as clean and flavorful as the 2-row beer. I didn’t have any problems drinking either beer, both were quite good, but I definitely preferred the beer made with 2-row.
...Not only did the 2-row beer have a slightly higher OG, ostensibly as a function of its higher extract potential, but it was also a bit paler in color than its 6-row counterpart.
Participants aren’t asked to describe what it is they perceived as being different, so there’s really no way of knowing for sure, but to my palate the 2-row beer had a fuller malt character I’ve come to expect whereas the beer made with 6-row malt was lacking a bit.

 

[Braumeister]

Enough. We're getting seriously into the reams of whatiffery. I'm most convinced by the recipe on Brewer's Friend which uses pale malt 60.5%, wheat malt 37.2% and a bit of carapils 2.3%. Lightly bittered with galaxy and a shedload of galaxy in a dry-hop charge.
Time to put my money where my mouth is and get the bugggger brewed up- and see if it's hazy from the hops. Just had 400g of nice fresh (2022) galaxy arrive at £4 a 100g so I'm well chuffed. Will report back on all matters to do with haziness and keep air inclusion at packaging stage to a minimum (in a non-paranoid sort of way).
It's going on tomorrow morning as I've got two beers to bottle up first.

Where on earth have you magiced up Galaxy that cheap from?

 

[An Ankoù]

Where on earth have you magiced up Galaxy that cheap from?

Supplier in Australia. Sure you have to pay postage, but I wanted some hops not available here so the galaxy was an extra bonus. Even cheaper for 250 or bigger packs, but I like to empty a new 100g packet in one hit if I can so I got 4 x 100.

 

[An Ankoù]

. And there's no yeasts being developed only for haziness

Which brings us full circle.
My OP was asking about CML Haze, which appears to be have the low water characteristics of Five but leaves a slight haze. My question was, Why?
Interesting Brulosophy experiment. I haven't noticed such a significant difference between the two Château pilsner malts and the specifications are not wildly different. Nevertheless, there is a certain graininess with the 6 row, which is not at all unpleasant and certainly not "dirty".

 

[Braumeister]

Supplier in Australia. Sure you have to pay postage, but I wanted some hops not available here so the galaxy was an extra bonus. Even cheaper for 250 or bigger packs, but I like to empty a new 100g packet in one hit if I can so I got 4 x 100.

Is it some type of secret supplier you can’t mention?

 

[Braumeister]

Is it some type of secret supplier you can’t mention?

Maybe beerco.com.au but £13 shipping means it’s hardly cheaper than CML

 

[RoomWithABrew]

Worth listening to craft beer and brewing podcast laura burns ofomega yeasts discussion about " stable beer haze " .

Podcast 238

Discusses, grains, hops, yeast and timings etc.