Best nottingham yeast sub

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

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

mdf191

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
165
Reaction score
0
Location
State College Pa
Which Wyeast is the closest to Nottingham dry yeast? I was looking at orfy's goblin and thinking about using a liquid yeast instead of his suggested Nottingham. I was thinking london or british initially. But now I am also thinking about 1469 West Yorkshire ale yeast. Any suggestions?
 
I used WLP002 when I made it, and it worked out very well. Although I think if I make it again I will just go with Nottingham, I just like that yeast a lot now.
 
[FONT=&quot]WLP039 is reputedly the Nottingham strain although imo it's a little too highly attenuating for an authentic HG clone unless you mash hot. The Brakespear yeast is reputedly available as WLP023, Burton Ale, they own the Wychwood brewery (or possibly it's vice verca but I wouldn't be supprised if they use the same yeasts). It would certainly be a good yeast for this beer but you would want to mash at around 66 deg c/151 deg f, it would make it more of a 3 dimensional beer as Nottingham is very bland.

[/FONT]
From the famous brewing town of Burton upon Trent, England, this yeast is packed with character. It provides delicious subtle fruity flavors like apple, clover honey and pear. Great for all English styles, IPA's, bitters, and pales. Excellent in porters and stouts.
Attenuation: 69-75%
Flocculation: Medium
Optimum Fermentation Temperature: 68-73°F
 
The suggestions here so far sound reasonable, but, out of curiosity, why do you want to use liquid yeast for this one? Nottingham is cheap, ferments aggressively, leaves a clean flavor, tolerates a wide range of temperatures, and flocculates well. To substitute a similar liquid strain in this case seems a waste of money.
 
My reason for going liquid is that I am brewing the extract/steep version of the goblin, not the AG. I was a little concerned nottingham would not leave my brew "rounded" enough.
 
mdf191 said:
My reason for going liquid is that I am brewing the extract/steep version of the goblin, not the AG. I was a little concerned nottingham would not leave my brew "rounded" enough.
Switching to a liquid version of Nottingham wont make any difference, it's the same yeast.

I'd go for the Ringwood or WLP023, they make great English Ales.

You'll need to rouse the Ringwood yeast daily or even twice daily though.
 
mdf191 said:
My reason for going liquid is that I am brewing the extract/steep version of the goblin, not the AG. I was a little concerned nottingham would not leave my brew "rounded" enough.
I don't quite follow this logic. Are you trying to make up for lost malt flavor by substituting yeast flavor? Or do you just want a less attenuative yeast?
 
I was concerned by how attenuative nottingham sounds. Plus I have only used liquid yeasts up until this point and have always had good results. Maybe I just have an unrealistic view that dry yeast produce less exciting beer. Guess that doesn't make alot of sense :)
 
mdf191 said:
I was concerned by how attenuative nottingham sounds. Plus I have only used liquid yeasts up until this point and have always had good results. Maybe I just have an unrealistic view that dry yeast produce less exciting beer. Guess that doesn't make alot of sense :)

Use the Nottingham. When using extract, you're better off with more attenuative yeast anyway. Most of my best beers have been made with dry yeast. I only use liquid for weizen or Belgian style beers...
 
mdf191 said:
I was concerned by how attenuative nottingham sounds. Plus I have only used liquid yeasts up until this point and have always had good results. Maybe I just have an unrealistic view that dry yeast produce less exciting beer. Guess that doesn't make alot of sense :)

You're absolutely correct, yeast plays an important part in completing the pallete of many English ales, two simple grain bills with 2 different yeasts will produce two very different beers, it's worth experimenting with English strains when brewing bitters, there's no right or wrong.

Nottingham is a very neutral yeast and adds little to the a beer, it's probably better suited to beers with bigger hop profiles. If you want to use a dry yeast with an English Ale, you wont go far wrong with Safale 04.
 
DAAB said:
You're absolutely correct, yeast plays an important part in completing the pallete of many English ales, two simple grain bills with 2 different yeasts will produce two very different beers, it's worth experimenting with English strains when brewing bitters, there's no right or wrong.

Nottingham is a very neutral yeast and adds little to the a beer, it's probably better suited to beers with bigger hop profiles. If you want to use a dry yeast with an English Ale, you wont go far wrong with Safale 04.

DAAB, how do you feel about Windsor dry yeast?
 
It's a great yeast, good for malty and dark beers, it's less attenuating than Nottingham, great for milds and brown ales but also good in all English ales.

If you're used to using Nottingham but want to move on without the hassel of liquid yeasts, give it a try, it wont dissapoint. The draw back is though is some people report it can take a little while to clear, I haven't found this myself though.
 
I was also going to suggest S-04 if you're looking for a maltier flavor. However, the recipe's originator claims great results with Nottingham. I would brew it at least once using ingredients as close as possible to the original recipe before making any substitutions.
 
I've done side by side fermentation of my English Bitter recipe with Wyeast 1968 and Nottingham. I couldn't detect any flavour difference between the 2. I use the Wyeast now but only because it is a flocculating demon and I get a crystal clear Bitter in 3-4 weeks.

GT
 
Back
Top