Waggle Dance(ish) recipe and want to hit a sweeter FG

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Cptn_Needa

Chookity-pok
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
199
Reaction score
171
Location
Toronto
This will be BIAB AG#3 for me and I thought I'd try a sort of Waggle Dance style brew as it's one of my wife's favourites (hoping to buy a few brownie points to allow AG#4 to go ahead 😉)
It's based on a British Ale style with some tweaks that I found on various Waggle Dance recipes.

4kg Maris Otter Pale
60g Crisp Cara
680g Honey (flameout)
40g Fuggles 21.2 IBU (60)
25g EKG 5.3 IBU (10)
Batch Volume 25l
11.5g S-04
Target OG 1.046
Target FG 1.011
Target ABV 4.6%

I have couple of questions if I may:
  1. Any thoughts or improvements I could make?
  2. How do I hit the FG (previous AG FG's have been 1.008 and 1.006 which overshot the target using US-05 and S-04 respectively)?
Cheers all :smallcheers:
 
It looks like a good recipe.
I would n't worry about the f.g. It's just what you recipe software expects it to be based on your O.G. and expected attenuation from the yeast you are using.
 
You could mash at about 67-68C and then use a yeast which doesn't metabolise maltotriose such as Lallemand / Danstar Windsor or Young's Ale Yeast.

Waggle Dance is a Youngs Beer. It's not the same company or yeast as Youngs Ale Yeast from Young's Home Brew, by the way.
 
Last edited:
Mash high is a favourite here. But US-05 (and even S-04) is very attenuative and not suitable at all for higher (finishing) gravity beer.

Windsor has been suggested, I use S-33 (but I'm finding this can be quite "sulphurous" in some beers). There is a bigger choice with liquid yeasts. Fast clearing yeasts (which US-05 isn't) is a good bet.

I'd be wary of doing both
I'm not so wary. And I'll do much, much, worse. But I guess I'm not very main-stream?
 
Mash high is a favourite here. But US-05 (and even S-04) is very attenuative and not suitable at all for higher (finishing) gravity beer.

Windsor has been suggested, I use S-33 (but I'm finding this can be quite "sulphurous" in some beers). There is a bigger choice with liquid yeasts. Fast clearing yeasts (which US-05 isn't) is a good bet.


I'm not so wary. And I'll do much, much, worse. But I guess I'm not very main-stream?

Guess it depends on what your aiming for. I havent used Windsor but have used MJ empire ale yeast which has about the same attenution I believe (around 65%ish). I'd be worried about getting an even lower attenuation. But tbf I havn't tried combining a medium attenuator with a high mash temp so can say for sure
 
But tbf I havn't tried combining a medium attenuator with a high mash temp so can say for sure
And, to be equally frank, neither have I as I don't particularly like sweet beers. But 67-68 isn't all that high. But all the honey, about 15% of the fermentables is going to leave no trace of body or sweetness and there's only a tad of caramalt. In the days when I used to drink honey beers, I always preferred Fuller's Honey Dew to Waggle Dance. Perhaps mash at 66C, then and see if it's sweet enough.
 
And, to be equally frank, neither have I as I don't particularly like sweet beers. But 67-68 isn't all that high. But all the honey, about 15% of the fermentables is going to leave no trace of body or sweetness and there's only a tad of caramalt. In the days when I used to drink honey beers, I always preferred Fuller's Honey Dew to Waggle Dance. Perhaps mash at 66C, then and see if it's sweet enough.

I agree the honey with thin things out and boost the attenuation. As mentioned in my post no.7 I used MJ empire ale. I had read it gave about 65% attenuation so added golden syrup to boost the attenuation up a bit. Iirc it ended up at around 75% which is what I was aiming for. But I mashed at 66C.

So if the OP is both mashing high(er), using a medium attenuator AND using loads of honey it'll all balance out to give him the desired result?
 
Guess it depends on what your aiming for. …
I reckon it's a combination of mash temperature and yeast attenuation. Higher mash temp will result in a higher proportion of maltotriose (and other dextrins). But US-05 and S-04 are quite happy munching maltotriose (might slow 'em down a bit).

Whereas the likes of S-33 seems incapable of dealing with maltotriose (but not stopped altogether, so S-33 can present surprises over time to those that bottle beer).
 
I reckon it's a combination of mash temperature and yeast attenuation. Higher mash temp will result in a higher proportion of maltotriose (and other dextrins). But US-05 and S-04 are quite happy munching maltotriose (might slow 'em down a bit).

Whereas the likes of S-33 seems incapable of dealing with maltotriose (but not stopped altogether, so S-33 can present surprises over time to those that bottle beer).

I thought S-04 had a lower attenuation than US-05 at around 75% (I've only ever S-04 it once)
 
… Any thoughts or improvements I could make? …
Away from attenuation and all that:

The honey governing body (whoever they are?) used to put out advice to only pasteurise the honey (heat to 65C for 30 mins, or 75C for a few seconds) to preserve the flavours. Bees see to it the honey is dosed with anti-bacterial elements anyway (basically, they spit in it).
 
Last edited:
I thought S-04 had a lower attenuation than US-05 at around 75% (I've only ever S-04 it once)
Yes US-05 is more attenuative, probably because it is so reluctant to drop out.

I have seen (dodgy) suggestions that S-04 is the "dry" Whitbread strain, like Wyeast #1098? Which I won't use; but the much less attenuative Whitbread strain (Wyeast #1099) gets lots of use from me (for historical recipes).
 
Yes US-05 is more attenuative, probably because it is so reluctant to drop out.

I have seen (dodgy) suggestions that S-04 is the "dry" Whitbread strain, like Wyeast #1098? Which I won't use; but the much less attenuative Whitbread strain (Wyeast #1099) gets lots of use from me (for historical recipes).

I may be mis-remembering this but I think someone 'sequenced' S-04 and it turned out not to be related to whitbread. As Im sure you're aware, there's lots of myth, false information and general BS floating about, about where S-04 is actually from.

Edit: This is what I was on about: "If CFG is Fermentis S-04 (and not S-40 as stated in the Table S1), then it interestingly doesn’t seem to cluster with the other Whitbread yeasts, but rather seems to be close to WLP006 Bedford and WLP013 London"

https://beer.suregork.com/?p=4000
 
You could mash at about 67-68C and then use a yeast which doesn't metabolise maltotriose such as Lallemand / Danstar Windsor or Young's Ale Yeast.
Last batch I mashed at 67c and used S-04 and it shot down to 1.006 so I'll have to up it a bit from there at least.

Would there be much benefit in upping the Cara in place of the Maris Otter?

Edit: Or are there bigger gains to towards the target by looking at yeast first?
 
I was hoping to use the same yeast as last time so I can start to build a bit of experience with it and how the differing fermentables impact the beer.

Very open to changing course on that though.
 
I was hoping to use the same yeast as last time so I can start to build a bit of experience with it and how the differing fermentables impact the beer.

Very open to changing course on that though.
I don't think S-04 is the most attenuative yeast in the universe, in fact it;s range is rather wide, but it will convert everything in the honey. Less attenuative yeast usually have a more traditional (English) aroma profile and I think Waggle Dance was more like this. I think you should leave the caramalt alone if you like the overall flavour, and work on the yeast.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top