Yeasts you have had zero success with

Something about wyeast 1028 London Ale just rubs me the wrong way. I'll admit it was a little misplaced in my most recent ESB, but it just gives too big a flavor even for a robust porter. When I drink that beer it tastes like I am chewing in the crust of some pumpernickel bread.

I know it's the yeast contributing to that flavor because it was consistent in the ESB & Porter.

Any yeasts you gents (and ladies) have had zero success with?

I don't like S-04, I've used it several times and never liked the results.

WB-06 is disappointing. It doesn't come close to what I expect from liquid Hefeweizen strains.

the dupont saison strain. has stalled out on me all three times I have used it. tried raising the temps all the way up in the 90's, resuspending the yeast, gave it three extra weeks. everything. nothing worked.

Clonefarmer said:

I don't like S-04, I've used it several times and never liked the results.

WB-06 is disappointing. It doesn't come close to what I expect from liquid Hefeweizen strains.

Click to expand...

oh yeah, the wb-06 for me tastes like a clove bomb. I like some banana and bubble gum in my hefes.


also, ringwood ale yeast tastes horrible to me. like buttered popcorn.

1028 makes a great English IPA..
A couple times, it's also given me some very strong and unpleasant (metallic) flavors in green beer, but after 3 - 4 weeks maturing, the beer tasted great.

-a.

nothing so far has been an issue I guess I'll be on look out for those........

s-05, I just can't get a profile I like, I wanted to like dry yeast too. It has a sulfur/peach thing at low temps and an apple/pear thing I don't care for in the high 60s.

s-04 I like better, but stopped using. I do not use the liquid "equivalent" either.

My final shot at dry yeast is going to be 34/70. I want to do some side by side tests with the liquid equivalent (830). I've been really digging the Ayinger yeast though so I'll have to break away from that to do the test.

In regards to the wyeast 1028-I really like it in a robust porter, but i like it better when i'm on the verge of overpitching. I did really dislike the wyeast belgian 1214. I fermented at a solid 67-68 and ended up drinking bananas. I would take one drink and belching bananas. Yuk

boxcar said:

oh yeah, the wb-06 for me tastes like a clove bomb. I like some banana and bubble gum in my hefes.


also, ringwood ale yeast tastes horrible to me. like buttered popcorn.

Click to expand...

These sound like procedural problems to me, more specifically your fermentation temps are off.

I have used these yeasts and did not have those issues.

Candida! That **** is for pu$$ies.

remilard said:

s-05, I just can't get a profile I like, I wanted to like dry yeast too. It has a sulfur/peach thing at low temps and an apple/pear thing I don't care for in the high 60s.

s-04 I like better, but stopped using. I do not use the liquid "equivalent" either.

My final shot at dry yeast is going to be 34/70. I want to do some side by side tests with the liquid equivalent (830). I've been really digging the Ayinger yeast though so I'll have to break away from that to do the test.

Click to expand...

I've had no troubles with S-05.
Oddly I don't like S-04 as it throws off a fruity profile that overwhelms me on ESB's, but it did work ok for some Ruination clones.

I just used 34/70 and was disappointed with the esters from it on a Munich Helles. While very drinkable it is not what I was after.

The only really bad experiences were earlier in the brewing process when I used liquid lager yeasts without temp control, mostly failures.

US-05. HATE it. Gave it a couple of tries, fermented the beers in the mid 60s and the resulting beer was super estery. Dumped one and am trying to age the other out. I'll never use it again.

boxcar said:

oh yeah, the wb-06 for me tastes like a clove bomb. I like some banana and bubble gum in my hefes.


also, ringwood ale yeast tastes horrible to me. like buttered popcorn.

Click to expand...

I think the buttered popcorn flavor isn't caused by the type of yeast.
My buddy brewed a lager and it had a very similar off flavor. That flavor comes from an error during your brewing.

CAUSES: A normal product of yeast during fermentation, it is re-absorbed during the course of a normal fermentation. Another cause is the gram-positive bacterium Pediococcus cerevisiae and similar strains in cooled beer, young beer, and aging beer. Lactobacillus strains in the mash can also cause this flavor if the mash held at low temperatures (below 131 degrees). Note that the aroma/taste produced by all of these causes is indistinguishable.

It should go away if you age it for a couple months

Windsor. Nice flavor profile, similar to English Ale, but doesn't freaking flocculate- the bottom of my fermenter looked like cottage cheese. WLP002 works fine for me, and WLP005 for a slightly drier fermentation.

I hate complaining too much, so let me say here that Nottingham is the best thing going. Cheap, reliable, clean... I've had decent results with the S-05, but Nottingham is my yeast for beer where I don't particularly want to notice the yeast.

Clonefarmer said:

I don't like S-04, I've used it several times and never liked the results.

Click to expand...

+1 This yeast is responsible for 3 of my worst brews ever. It doesn't attenuate well, drops out below about 62 degrees and makes my beer have an odd taste that just isn't pleasent.

I use nottingham for my English styles, nottingham, pacman, US-05 and Chimay yeast account for nearly %100 of my brewing.

MattHollingsworth said:

US-05. HATE it. Gave it a couple of tries, fermented the beers in the mid 60s and the resulting beer was super estery. Dumped one and am trying to age the other out. I'll never use it again.

Click to expand...

Are you serious? I'm drinking an amarillo SMaSH right now that I did with S-05. It's super clean! Really.

oldschool said:

Are you serious? I'm drinking an amarillo SMaSH right now that I did with S-05. It's super clean! Really.

Click to expand...

US-05 is one of the cleanest strains on the market. I would be willing to be bet fermentation was not in the low 60's. US-05 is even clean in the low 70s.

I've had bad beers using US-5 pitched dry and/or too warm. I've only had success with it if I rehydrate, then pitch at 60F and let it warm to 70 by day 10. Otherwise, diacetyl bomb.

My biggest problem yeast was the White Labs Cream Ale Blend. It was just crappy in general, both in flavor profile (the temperatures were well-controlled), and in the flocculation. Asking around, many other members of my brewclub say it's kind of a dog. One recommended I go with an alt yeast at the bottom end of its temperature range. Should I ever get a yen to try a cream ale again, I'm going to go with that advice.

petep1980 said:

Something about wyeast 1028 London Ale just rubs me the wrong way. I'll admit it was a little misplaced in my most recent ESB, but it just gives too big a flavor even for a robust porter. When I drink that beer it tastes like I am chewing in the crust of some pumpernickel bread.

I know it's the yeast contributing to that flavor because it was consistent in the ESB & Porter.

Click to expand...

1028 is what I use in the beer of mine everyone likes best (all-Fuggles IPA).

I've made pretty horrible beer with Wyeast 1098. I find it to be very tart and it attenuate like beast so that left with me really dry beer.

Also, people swear by the Fuller's strain, but I haven't had much luck with that one. I must admit that it got me curious to try again with it cause I suspect I got a bad pack of yeast to start with. But I battled stuck fermentations, under attenuate sugar beer, and it's so darn malty that I had trouble figuring out how to balance the hops. I'll try it once more with revised recipes, but this yeast is on my "handle with extreme caution" list.

Finally, Wyeast trappist 3787 has been unkind to me. I got a lot of awful flavors from this one.

mithion said:

I've made pretty horrible beer with Wyeast 1098. I find it to be very tart and it attenuate like beast so that left with me really dry beer.

Click to expand...

1098 smells ridiculous out of the fermenter, but it gets out the way w/ enough fruitiness leftover to make a good ESB. My basement got cold which is why I switched my ESB to the 1028, which is where I began to dislike it so.

Bobby_M said:

I've had bad beers using US-5 pitched dry and/or too warm. I've only had success with it if I rehydrate, then pitch at 60F and let it warm to 70 by day 10. Otherwise, diacetyl bomb.

Click to expand...

I've experienced the butter bomb with 05 as well when I made the Bee Cave Haus Pale. If I try 05 again, I'll try the rehydrate/pitch at 60 technique.

The only yeast I've actively disliked was California V (WLP051). The "more fruity" was a lot more than I liked. Worked fine though.

pacman yeast is pretty terrible too.

oldschool said:

Are you serious? I'm drinking an amarillo SMaSH right now that I did with S-05. It's super clean! Really.

Click to expand...

permo said:

US-05 is one of the cleanest strains on the market. I would be willing to be bet fermentation was not in the low 60's. US-05 is even clean in the low 70s.

Click to expand...

Bobby_M said:

I've had bad beers using US-5 pitched dry and/or too warm. I've only had success with it if I rehydrate, then pitch at 60F and let it warm to 70 by day 10. Otherwise, diacetyl bomb.

Click to expand...

US-05 is my go-to yeast for the very reason that, in my experience, it's clean, not too estery. I've also found it not to be too picky about temps, as permo indicated. I've never noticed diacetyl using US-05 (but I have noticed it with certain other strains...I'd have to check my notes at home). I'm not sure why others are having these problems...I'm just glad I'm not!

oldschool said:

Are you serious? I'm drinking an amarillo SMaSH right now that I did with S-05. It's super clean! Really.

Click to expand...

permo said:

US-05 is one of the cleanest strains on the market. I would be willing to be bet fermentation was not in the low 60's. US-05 is even clean in the low 70s.

Click to expand...

Yup, serious. I hate that yeast. Fermented at 64 and 67 with a temp controller and a thermal well. Came out way, way too estery for me. And I'm not alone. Lots of other folks have experienced the same thing. We're in the minority, but we're out here. In my experience it's doesn't behave or taste anything like Wyeast 1056 or White Labs WLP001. The two beers I made with it were horrible enough that I dumped one and am trying to age out the other one in hopes that it will come out okay in the long run. I see no reason to waste my time or effort with that yeast when I've had *good* experience with liquid yeast for 106 batches. I'll stick with what I know gives me good results rather than what other people tell me will give me good results when I know otherwise from direct experience.

MattHollingsworth said:

Yup, serious. I hate that yeast. Fermented at 64 and 67 with a temp controller and a thermal well. Came out way, way too estery for me. And I'm not alone. Lots of other folks have experienced the same thing.

Click to expand...

Count me in. I've only used it 4 times (3 pales and a stout) with fermenter temps between 60-65, raising it to 68-70 at the end of fermentation. The only beer I liked out of them was a stout. The rest...too estery. I rehydrated appropriately on all but one.

Fleischmanns rapid rise.

boxcar said:

pacman yeast is pretty terrible too.

Click to expand...

Whaat?! You must be kidding... What is there about it to hate?

Only yeasts I refuse to use are S-04 and WY1098. Both whitbread i think.

The jury is still out on Danstar's Munich. I either had a snap ferment or it is very, very slow. No time to check until after the weekend. Really stinks in the fermentation cabinet.

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

Kilted Brewer said:

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

Click to expand...

wow, my problem with nottingham has been the opposite, it eats every freakin sugar in the beer and dries it out too much.

Count me in with respect to not being a fan of 05. I really have not had a bad experience with any Wyeast yeast strain knock on wood.

Interesting to hear that someone does not like Pacman. I have used it on a number I'd different IPA's and IIPA's with great results. One of my favorites. Montanaandy

I guess everyone tastes and procedures are different, I love us-05 for all my apa's, american IPA's.

I've also had mixed results with 1028. I've used it twice and when I bottled the beer it was so minerally it tasted like I was licking rocks. It's gotten better with time (about 3 months) but its still there and sometimes more than others.

Danstar Windsor. Three separate brews and have never done better than 55% attenuation and it convinced me to keg. I had a failed bottle condition with it. Flat and sweet Nut Brown kit billed as an easy no fail brew. It was an early attempt but to I had no temp control at that point and fermented on the warm side, probably 70F.

rcrabb22 said:

Danstar Windsor. Three separate brews and have never done better than 55% attenuation and it convinced me to keg. I had a failed bottle condition with it. Flat and sweet Nut Brown kit billed as an easy no fail brew. It was an early attempt but to I had no temp control at that point and fermented on the warm side, probably 70F.

Click to expand...

Try WLP002 if you want the slightly sweeter English character, and WLP005 for the drier character. I'm about to bottle an ESB made with the 005, and it's fantastic- like a great English ale. Windsor's a product I don't have any love for.

Interesting to see Nottingham on this list. I'll not argue, but I love the way it dries out a beer. I love dry, crisp pale ales, so it's my favorite for those.

Kilted Brewer said:

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

Click to expand...

I'll second this - I've only tries Nottingham twice, and neither actually worked, meaning that both times I eventually had to pitch (s-05 once and s-04 once) to save the day. So I don't know what I'd think of Notty that did its thing, it may be a great yeast, but the quality control problems make me feel like it's just not worth trying again given all the other good yeasts out there. I have some replacement packs they sent me after I reported my problems, so if it turns out they have solved their issues then I'll give it a try but for now there are still new posts of problems with recent batches (it seems like almost daily).

Otherwise I've had good luck with all the yeasts I've used - the s04 and s05 others complain about have both been good for me, as have 34/70 for lagers and wyeast's 1968, 1028, 1098, 1318, 1275 and 1450. It may help that my basement has been at 58-60 ambient, so I've had all the ferments nice and cool. When it is warmer this summer there could be more difficulties.

Grains are a different story - I've used brown malt when I probably shouldn't have and the results have been almost undrinkable. I'll probably try it again but only in a recipe others can vouch for. I will never use Briess Munich again - it's made from 6-row, which I would never have guessed to ask about but after tasting the results in more than one beer it was clear something was off, and I eventually figured out what. That has turned me off of Briess in general - are any of their products high quality?

MattHollingsworth said:

US-05. HATE it. Gave it a couple of tries, fermented the beers in the mid 60s and the resulting beer was super estery. Dumped one and am trying to age the other out. I'll never use it again.

Click to expand...

I am in this camp. US-05 is definitely more estery than the WLP001 and Wyeast 1056. I have used all three and will not go back to US-05 unless I'm in a pinch. I don't hate US-05 as much as MattHollingsworth, but the liquid counterparts produce cleaner beers and allow the hop complexity to show through more on American PAs and IPAs.

I think in the case of liquid yeast (and perhaps dry as well), sometimes we get a package that has been handled poorly, we use it and get poor results, and then we naturally think we we don't like the yeast. I had poor results with Denny's Fave 50 but after reading other's comments on it I think I just got an unhealthy packet. I washed it and made a brew with the washed yeast and it was better than the orig batch but still sluggish/underattenuated so I tossed the rest. But other than that I really can't think of a yeast, that I used more just once, that I had zero success with. Sometimes I'm not crazy about the initial batch but I usually like the second or third batch from washed yeast and I tend to base it more on that.