Nottingham for high gravity brew?

I'm going to be brewing my IIPA this weekend and I'd like to use Nottingham but I've never used it in a big beer before. I've had great success with it in all other beers and I'm looking for a neutral yeast.

Can Nottingham handle 1.093?

I haven't used Nottingham up that high but I have used US05 (and I pitch two packs with high grav worts)....Danstar describes Nottingham as having "relatively high alcohol tolerance" and includes this in the FAQ:

I am making a high gravity beer. Does this affect the amount of dry yeast I should add to my wort?

Yes, for high gravity beers the pitching rate should be increased. The rule of thumb is one million cells per degree Plato per ml. Under-pitching can result in slow or stuck fermentation.

I have had great success in BIG beers with white labs Irish Ale yeast. I have not risked dry yeast in ahigh grav brew.

To insure success, you can ferment it out with only some of your fermentables in place, in other words brew 3.5 gallons or so of a weaker beer, then add a gallon of concentrated wort after a few days, and repeat if necessary. This method can coax a yeast strain well beyond it's advertised alcohol tolerance. But don't expect it to bottle carb!

cheezydemon said:

I have had great success in BIG beers with white labs Irish Ale yeast. I have not risked dry yeast in ahigh grav brew.

To insure success, you can ferment it out with only some of your fermentables in place, in other words brew 3.5 gallons or so of a weaker beer, then add a gallon of concentrated wort after a few days, and repeat if necessary. This method can coax a yeast strain well beyond it's advertised alcohol tolerance. But don't expect it to bottle carb!

Click to expand...

No bottling here. 1.090-ish is high, but not so high that I feel the need to brew multiple worts and do a stepped fermentation.

I guess this will prove to be a valuable experiment. I may just pitch two packets and go with a blowoff.

I've done it before. If I was to do it again, I think I would pitch 2 packets. First impressions were a sour/apple taste after 3 weeks. After another month, I tasted a bottled I had forced carbed. Was real nice.

You shouldn't have a problem at all, I did a 1.087 stout with it and it turned out amazing. Pitch 2 sachets (assuming 11g size) and make sure you properly rehydrate the yeast as per the directions - don't pitch directly into the wort.

Maybe I missed something here, but why not just make a big starter with the Nottingham??

Also, i just checked the stats on the first non-kit beer i ever made. I used 2 packets of Nottingham, on a SG of 1.092 Imp Stout, rehydrated (no starter as i didn't know about those back then) and it fermented down to 1.022 which was the target....made a 9.5% abv beer.

kenb said:

Maybe I missed something here, but why not just make a big starter with the Nottingham??

Click to expand...

I'm almost out of DME and I forgot to include some on my latest AHS order, so a starter isn't going to work out for me this time around. Normally I'd make a huge starter for this, but since I probably don't have enough DME left I thought I'd ask about the viability of pitching 2 packets of Nottingham.

kenb said:

Maybe I missed something here, but why not just make a big starter with the Nottingham??

Click to expand...

DON'T make a starter with dry yeast. Just pitch the appropriate amount. If it needs 2-3 packets it is still cheap. Dry yeast has been propogated and preserved in such a way to provide the best quality of healthy, well fed and viable yeast possible if rehydrated properly. As homebrewers we cannot duplicate this.

GT

Got Trub? said:

DON'T make a starter with dry yeast. Just pitch the appropriate amount. If it needs 2-3 packets it is still cheap. Dry yeast has been propogated and preserved in such a way to provide the best quality of healthy, well fed and viable yeast possible if rehydrated properly. As homebrewers we cannot duplicate this.

GT

Click to expand...

Not to get off topic, but i have never heard it being a bad thing to make a starter from dry yeast. Why not give them as much of a head start as possible?

kenb said:

Not to get off topic, but i have never heard it being a bad thing to make a starter from dry yeast. Why not give them as much of a head start as possible?

Click to expand...

It's often cited not to make a starter with dry since the dry yeasts are packaged with the nutritional reserves optimized to get rolling pitched directly into wort. When pitching multiple packets isn't an option for some reason and you have to make a starter to pitch, I have seen it recommended to allow your starter to ferment out fully before pitching so in essence you are pitching a mini-yeast cake.

brewt00l said:

It's often cited not to make a starter with dry since the dry yeasts are packaged with the nutritional reserves optimized to get rolling pitched directly into wort. When pitching multiple packets isn't an option for some reason and you have to make a starter to pitch, I have seen it recommended to allow your starter to ferment out fully before pitching so in essence you are pitching a mini-yeast cake.

Click to expand...

I understand some manufacturers such as Danstar do pack the yeast with an energizer. But wouldn't it vary from manufacturer to manufacturer as far as whether a starter is best? And also as whether doing a high gravity beer or not?

kenb said:

I understand some manufacturers such as Danstar do pack the yeast with an energizer. But wouldn't it vary from manufacturer to manufacturer as far as whether a starter is best? And also as whether doing a high gravity beer or not?

Click to expand...

From what I understand, the commonly available dry yeasts are prepared in this manner...can't speak to any brand that prepares their yeast differently. Fermentis, Danstar and IIRC Muntons do not have any recommendations on starters.

Either way, the point of a starter would be to get a higher cell count of healthy yeasties, ready to rock....exactly what pitching a second packet does for a buck and change extra.

here's a tidbit from Danstar:

"Something similar happens when using Active Dry Yeast. The factory builds into each yeast cell an abundance of the stress factor; trehalose. Our recommendations is to rehydrate the yeast in warm water and pitch into the wort (or must) within 30 minutes, because the yeast will begin to metabolize its carbohydrate reserve including trehalose immediately upon reactivation and weaken the yeast if it is not in the presence of a new supply of energy. It will have also used up the stress factor that would have assisted it in adapting to the new osmotic environment. I am sure that there is more to the explanation than I have given.

Dr. Clayton Cone"
http://www.danstaryeast.com/library/pitching_temp.html

I have not used the Nottingham yeast before, but could the fact that it flocculates very well get in the way with fermenting big beers. I mean that it would leave to many sugars begind which may result in to much sweetness.

Kai

i think that if you take the time to "rouse" your fermentation once a day after 3-4 days very high flocculating yeasts will not be an issue with attenuation.


i have a big beer (OG 1.114) that is still fermenting ---- i rouse it once or twice a day and still get CO2 to bubble out of the airlock ....


i am relatively inexperienced though ...

i absolutely love nottingham yeast and use it quite regularly. i even keep a handful of pakets around for those "just in case" situations. good ol' knock it out nittingham. i've make anything from ipa's to stouts with it and have had great results.

if you have dme or sugar you should be able to just build a starter to get the yeast going and reproducing enough to match that of the effect of pitching 2 packets.

save your yeast and build a starter. or just pitch one and when you see the air lock activity slow down give her a stir or shake to get it rolling again.

Nottingham may flocculate well, but in my experience it has a voracious appetite. It chewed through my 1.087 stout to 1.018 (FG) in 7 days at 65F (wort temp, not ambient)! This was 2 sachets, re-hydrated as per directions from the manufacturer.

An extra sachet of dry yeast is cheaper than the DME/LME for a starter and even if you make a starter with a dry pack, you so massively overpitched the starter that you'll get far less growth than you would with a cheap 2nd sachet of yeast. In my mind it's just not worth it.

I agree, a second pack is a no-brainer to making a starter with Nottingham.

jbreiding said:

if you have dme or sugar you should be able to just build a starter to get the yeast going and reproducing enough to match that of the effect of pitching 2 packets.

save your yeast and build a starter. or just pitch one and when you see the air lock activity slow down give her a stir or shake to get it rolling again.

Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that not only is it not recommended or needed to make a starter for dry yeast, but that it will actually negatively affect the yeast. It will not build a higher yeast count, it will just shock the yeast and probably kill some. Easiest just to pitch two rehydrated packs

Jayfro21 said:

I am pretty sure that not only is it not recommended or needed to make a starter for dry yeast, but that it will actually negatively affect the yeast. It will not build a higher yeast count, it will just shock the yeast and probably kill some. Easiest just to pitch two rehydrated packs

Click to expand...

+1. Exactly the same arguments I have heard.

I also personally think of it this way:

pack of Nottingham yeast: $1.50

1/2 lb of DME to make 1/2 gallon starter: $2

Therefore for the same effect an additional pack is cheaper. Not even worth considering a starter after additional sanitation concerns, imho.

bradsul said:

Nottingham may flocculate well, but in my experience it has a voracious appetite. It chewed through my 1.087 stout to 1.018 (FG) in 7 days at 65F (wort temp, not ambient)! This was 2 sachets, re-hydrated as per directions from the manufacturer.

An extra sachet of dry yeast is cheaper than the DME/LME for a starter and even if you make a starter with a dry pack, you so massively overpitched the starter that you'll get far less growth than you would with a cheap 2nd sachet of yeast. In my mind it's just not worth it.

Click to expand...

I've made a couple beers in the 7.75-8.5% ABV with Nottinghams... they always ferment out quite dry and RAPIDLY. You really gotta be careful about blowing your primary up if you use an airlock.

i've also found nottingham to have great attenuation the few times i've used it. never had to rouse anything.

On the reason to NOT make a starter for dry yeast:
An 11g packet of dry yeast has many more yeast cells than a tube or packet of liquid yeast. When pitched in a modest sized starter there is more yeast cells than the starter can support. So the yeast do not reproduce and only use up reserves built into them by the manufacturer. At best they are in no better shape than they would have been from rehydration. At worst the viability has been decreased considerably.
Plus as was mentioned DME for the starter costs similar to the price of a second packet and takes more effort.

Craig

Jayfro21 said:

I am pretty sure that not only is it not recommended or needed to make a starter for dry yeast, but that it will actually negatively affect the yeast. It will not build a higher yeast count, it will just shock the yeast and probably kill some. Easiest just to pitch two rehydrated packs

Click to expand...

how is it going to negatively affect the yeast if they are given a chance to reach the first rest period before being pitched? as for the yeast count, of course they are going to reproduce, if they didnt the fermentation would take an extremely long time.

i am trying to figure out how building a starter is that much different than just harvesting the yeast or re-pitching over a yeast cake. there isn't much of a difference other than the amount of time between fermentations.

jbreiding said:

how is it going to negatively affect the yeast if they are given a chance to reach the first rest period before being pitched? as for the yeast count, of course they are going to reproduce, if they didnt the fermentation would take an extremely long time.

i am trying to figure out how building a starter is that much different than just harvesting the yeast or re-pitching over a yeast cake. there isn't much of a difference other than the amount of time between fermentations.

Click to expand...

True, except some of the numbers I've seen say that with 100B cells in a 1L starter, you get ~150B cell, with a 2L starter, you get ~200B.

Now figure that you're starting with ~220B from a dry Nottingham packet, there simply isn't enough sugar to get enough reproduction to make it worth the time, effort, and cost of DME. It's not different than making a starter from a yeast cake, it's just that it's unnecessary and doesn't gain you much.

Add to that the fact that you're depleting the yeast's reserves of carbohydrates and unsaturated fatty acids that they had to start with, and making a starter from dry yeast is a losing proposition.

Rehydrating two pack should work for sure, also just check out the pdf on the danstar website, under each strain of yeast

I know I'm late to the party on this. But I have brewed some Belgian Strong Ale at 13% and used some Mangrove Jack dry yeast, M41 and M31 respectively. Brewed, transferred to fermenter, pitched the yeast directly into the wart, 2 packets. Had a runoff tube instead of a typical airlock and it burbled and gurbbled the whole way to 13.4% in about 3 months. I personally don't do yeast starters with dry yeast and just pitch it in the fermenter and give it a mighty shake with the sterilized cap on.

Also, I do a Wassail Apple Ale that uses Nottingham yeast and again, pitch that bastard right in the fermenter. Apple ale got to 9.62% and did just fine on it's own, of course with a runoff, but I did use one packet and then the final week of fermenting I pitched a packet of Sweet Cuvee wine yeast to help mellow it out.

I brewed a big beer right in the range you are talking about. It was a Christmas beer and started at 1.096. A month later it was 1.014. IMO Nottingham thined this beer out a little too much. If I was to do it over again, I might use Chico, just because the yeast is so clean and versatile.

So instead of Nottingham, which of S-04 or S-05? I am a big fan of Bry-97, but this imperial brown I've made might need something more resilient.