IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Forum Rules Product Reviews - How To
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Nottingham Dry Ale yeast, Great alternative to liquid
What do you think of Nottingham yeast for low yeast profile ales?
What do you think of Nottingham yeast for low yeast profile ales?
10 Excellent [ 21 ] ** [32.31%]
9 [ 15 ] ** [23.08%]
8 [ 18 ] ** [27.69%]
7 [ 4 ] ** [6.15%]
6 [ 2 ] ** [3.08%]
5 [ 1 ] ** [1.54%]
4 [ 2 ] ** [3.08%]
3 [ 2 ] ** [3.08%]
2 [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
1 Awful [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
Total Votes: 115
Guests cannot vote 
SilvrBck
post Jan 5 2005, 05:31 PM
Post #1


Assistant Brewer
***

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Joined: 18-November 03
From: Tourmaline Surf Park
Member No.: 1,374



Dry yeast used to be taboo in the world of homebrewing. Questionable purity and poor viability made switching to liquid yeast an all but mandatory step in the progression of a homebrewer. However, a few yeast suppliers have overcome these problems and are now offering excellent quality dry yeast for homebrewing for a fraction of the cost of comparable liquid strains.

Nottingham dry ale yeast is a very neutral yeast which is perfect for American Pale Ales and IPAs where the hops are the highlights. This yeast starts very quickly, attenuates fully, and flocculates very well. Most of my fermentations have taken between 2-4 days even with moderate gravity worts.

One of the best parts about using dry yeast is that you don't have to make a starter. One 11g packet provides an optimal pitch rate. At the factory the yeast are pumped full of the components they need to finish a regular strength beer. This means no starter and no aeration! You can also re-use this yeast for future batches but you must then make a starter since the yeast have used up their reserves finishing the last batch.

It is important to properly rehydrate the yeast to optimize viable cell count. Between the time that the yeast are first introduced into liquid and the time they are fully rehydrated they cannot regulate what passes through their partially hydrated membranes. If you pitch the dry yeast directly into wort, all the sugars and proteins and everything else rushes into the cell which kills some of the cells. So, make sure to properly rehydrate the yeast according to the instructions to get the most viable cells into your wort.

Some brewers have reported that you can get banana flavors by fermenting at too high a temperature with this yeast so you want to make sure you're under 72F or so.

For 1/3 the cost of a comparable, low yeast flavor profile liquid strain you can purchase one 11 gram packet of Nottingham dry yeast which does not require a starter or aeration to fully ferment your standard gravity ale. That makes sense to me! (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/biggrin.gif)

SB
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cj in j
post Jan 5 2005, 06:13 PM
Post #2


on hiatus...
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 3,650
Joined: 25-March 02
Member No.: 69



I used Nottingham in a couple of beers, when I get the urge to brew buy don't have any yeast starter going. It works great -- quick starts, vigorous fermentation, complete and quick finishes, good clarity. I always keep a couple packs in my fridge for emergencies as well. It's a good yeast, highly recommended.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phalanxausage
post Jan 5 2005, 06:32 PM
Post #3


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 763
Joined: 24-September 02
From: charlotte, nc
Member No.: 197



I've used Nottingham & Windsor with good results. In the side by side tastings they were considered thin & lacking complexity but if you want a neutral yeast they work great. Especially good for on they fly extract brewing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Triple Freak
post Jan 6 2005, 10:45 AM
Post #4


Brewmaster
*****

Group: banned
Posts: 1,458
Joined: 9-July 03
From: In a van, down by the river...
Member No.: 889



You have to be careful of the temp when you use Nottingham to ferment with. I suggest nothing above 70°F. I used it at 72°F, and got an overpowering banana flavor & aroma.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Listermann
post Jan 6 2005, 11:36 AM
Post #5


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 4-April 04
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
Member No.: 1,986



For homebrewing, I recommend against rehydration. This is a case where theory is different from practice. I am sure that all the theoretical reasons to rehydrate are true and If I was going to use dry yeast by the pound in a commercial operation, I would rehydrate. However from a practical perspective, it is totally unecessary and probably only margionally useful. Its down side, besides the trouble, is the very real risk of botching the operation. I get the "it isn't fermenting" call a lot and a good portion of these boil down to a botched rehydration. My feeling is that if it is not necessary and can screw things up, why do it?

I can't recall hearing anybody complain that their beer turned out bad because they didn't rehydrate.

Dan Listermann
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilvrBck
post Jan 6 2005, 12:04 PM
Post #6


Assistant Brewer
***

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Joined: 18-November 03
From: Tourmaline Surf Park
Member No.: 1,374



QUOTE(Listermann @ Jan 6 2005, 11:37 AM)
For homebrewing, I recommend against rehydration.  This is a case where theory is different from practice.  I am sure that all the theoretical reasons to rehydrate are true and If I was going to use dry yeast by the pound in a commercial operation, I would rehydrate.  However from a practical perspective, it is totally unecessary and probably only margionally useful.  Its down side, besides the trouble, is the very real risk of botching the operation.  I get the "it isn't fermenting" call a lot and a good portion of these boil down to a botched rehydration.  My feeling is that if it is not necessary and can screw things up, why do it?

I can't recall hearing anybody complain that their beer turned out bad because they didn't rehydrate.

Dan Listermann
*


I actually brought this up with them in an email not that long ago. I think the reason that people still get good fermentations with no rehydration is that there is a huge amount of yeast in those packets. Even if you kill off 45% you are still getting a decent viable cell count in there. I think there is a risk of stuck fermentation if you kill off too many. I would equate your suggestion to saying, "Why make a starter for liquid strains? It is another source of contamination." You can still ferment a beer by pitching a white labs vial but it is better if you make a starter. If you want the most yeast in your brew then you should rehydrate and do it properly. The fact that people can't follow directions hardly makes it not worthwhile. But I understand where you're coming from. You must get awfully sick of hearing the same thing over and over.

SB
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Listermann
post Jan 6 2005, 12:28 PM
Post #7


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 791
Joined: 4-April 04
From: Cincinnati, Ohio
Member No.: 1,986



As a sanity check a while back I fermented two Sankeys of the same wort with Nottingham. I rehydrated one and just pitched the other dry. Frankly there was no noticable difference in lagtime that I could see and they both tasted the same. It is a "theory and practice " thing.

It is my opinion that pitching dry yeast directly in to the wort is more dependable than rehydrating it and any flavor differences are very marginal at best, but that is just me.

Now not using a starter for standard smack packs is a big boo-boo in my book. I can taste the difference frequently. Whitelab ale vials can be used straight, but I like to do starters for lagers. I suspect the same applys for the new Activator packs but I haven't had the experience to tell.

Dan Listermann
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_James B Burke_*
post Jan 7 2005, 11:10 AM
Post #8





Guests






Sulfur smell in primary:
I have a batch of porter using Nottingham. It has been in primary for 5 days now after a wild fermentation and has reached final gravity. I smell a bit of sulfur and (after reading other posts on sulfur smell) I expect it to fade soon. BTW the sample I tasted was pretty nummy.

Is this yeast known to produce sulfur?

jbb
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bonjour
post Jan 7 2005, 02:33 PM
Post #9


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 559
Joined: 20-October 04
From: Troy, Michigan
Member No.: 2,855



Here are the rehydration recommendations from the Fermentis site:
QUOTE
Re-hydrate the dry yeast into yeast cream in a stirred vessel prior to pitching. Sprinkle the dry yeast in 10 times its own weight of sterile water or wort at 27C ± 3C. Once the expected weight of dry yeast is reconstituted into cream by this method (this takes about 15 to 30 minutes), maintain a gentle stirring for another 30 minutes. Then pitch the resultant cream into the fermentation vessel.
QUOTE
Alternatively, pitch dry yeast directly in the fermentation vessel providing the temperature of the wort is above 20C. Progressively sprinkle the dry yeast into the wort ensuring the yeast covers all the surface of wort available in order to avoid clumps. Leave for 30 minutes and then mix the wort e.g. using aeration.


This coincides with WYEAST and White Labs recommending pitching at a temp higher than fermentation then cooling it down. A step I'm sure many of us ignore.

Fred
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jayflap
post Jan 8 2005, 12:18 AM
Post #10


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,897
Joined: 7-January 04
From: Mawalkee, Wescansen #1 drunk city in the US
Member No.: 1,547



I love Nottingham. I have pretty much started using this as a replacement in a beer that asks for 1056, it is clean and neutral.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
UberOctaFrank
post Jan 8 2005, 12:56 AM
Post #11


Assistant Brewer
***

Group: Members
Posts: 100
Joined: 10-October 04
From: Bloomington, IN
Member No.: 2,798



Good results with one packet of Nottingham on a 1.080 OG porter. I'd use this again on hoppy or dark beers which don't require any sort of yeast character.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
azu
post Jan 10 2005, 06:30 PM
Post #12


Brewer
****

Group: Members
Posts: 434
Joined: 8-June 03
From: Sellersville, PA
Member No.: 779



QUOTE(James B Burke @ Jan 7 2005, 11:11 AM)
Sulfur smell in primary:
I have a batch of porter using Nottingham.  It has been in primary for 5 days now after a wild fermentation and has reached final gravity.  I smell a bit of sulfur and (after reading other posts on sulfur smell) I expect it to fade soon.  BTW the sample I tasted was pretty nummy. 

Is this yeast known to produce sulfur? 

jbb
*



I have not had that, but I didn't use for a Porter. I would Imagine a little aging that Sulfur will go away. Just an example, WL 029 gives off a Sulfur smell. but after some aging it produces an excellent brew with no off flavors!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
azmtnbiker
post Jan 10 2005, 07:23 PM
Post #13


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,008
Joined: 26-October 04
From: Chandler,AZ
Member No.: 2,896



I love the stuff. Used on my very first batch and it came out great. I always get a complete fermentation with it compared to WLP 01 or Wyeast 1056. Nice to have when you don't have time for a starter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kernel_panic
post Jan 12 2005, 09:24 AM
Post #14


Assistant Brewer
***

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 10-December 04
From: VA
Member No.: 3,145



very good yeast. had been having problems with attenuation (muntons dry), but this yeast gets the job done. it got a 1.070 brew to 1.012 in 4 days. flocs out extremely well. slight banana aroma (ferm temps 72dF), can't say it added anything to flavor, but thats what i was going for. Good dry yeast to use and keep on hand for emergencies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zombudis
post Jan 29 2005, 07:00 PM
Post #15


Brewmaster
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 767
Joined: 20-July 04
From: San Antonio, TX
Member No.: 2,456



What a great yeast. I recently pitched 2 packets (without rehydrating) into a 1.076 batch and the fermentation went nuts right off the bat. It fermented down to 1.016 and the beer tasted awesome at bottling today. There was a HUGE yeast cake lurking down in the primary. I am thinking that I will not bother with starters anymore for beers that are amenable to a clean yeast profile.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th August 2018 - 07:23 AM