Nottingham Yeast

CornyKegs 728
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.
birch said:
Chalk up another one. Brewed a cascade pale ale Sunday and decided to pitch a pack of notty that I've had sitting around for a while. While I didn't take note of the batch numbers, I bought it last fall so the timelines match up, and here we are Tuesday morning and nothing. I'm fermenting in a 6.5 carboy so I can definitely tell there is nothing going on.

Guess I'll head to the LHBS over lunch and grab some S-05 to pitch tonight.
Click to expand...

It's too early to be worried about that yet.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/fermentation-can-take-24-72-hrs-show-visible-signs-43635/
 
SumnerH said:
It's too early to be worried about that yet.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/fermentation-can-take-24-72-hrs-show-visible-signs-43635/
Click to expand...

That thread bothers me a bit. If the yeast is healthy, the pitch rate and temperature was appropriate, a normal beer should be practically finished fermenting at 72 hours. If it's Tuesday morning and I dint see activity on a Sunday's brew, i'd worry too. Sure it might start couple days late, but that doesn't mean the yeast are behaving properly. Fast healthy starts are critical good flavor in your beer. Last fall, many people had late starts to their notty, ask them how their beer came out. I'm one of them, and my beer came out noticeably off.
 
jmo88 said:
That thread bothers me a bit. If the yeast is healthy, the pitch rate and temperature was appropriate, a normal beer should be practically finished fermenting at 72 hours. If it's Tuesday morning and I dint see activity on a Sunday's brew, i'd worry too. Sure it might start couple days late, but that doesn't mean the yeast are behaving properly. Fast healthy starts are critical good flavor in your beer. Last fall, many people had late starts to their notty, ask them how their beer came out. I'm one of them, and my beer came out noticeably off.
Click to expand...

I could have typed this exact post: my sentiments exactly. Or, in HBT parlance, +1
 
birch said:
Chalk up another one. Brewed a cascade pale ale Sunday and decided to pitch a pack of notty that I've had sitting around for a while. While I didn't take note of the batch numbers, I bought it last fall so the timelines match up, and here we are Tuesday morning and nothing. I'm fermenting in a 6.5 carboy so I can definitely tell there is nothing going on.

Guess I'll head to the LHBS over lunch and grab some S-05 to pitch tonight.
Click to expand...

Might want to take a quick hydro reading. You wouldn't be the first person to miss a fast ferment. Although, if you are like me, you check the thing on the hour every hour.
 
passedpawn said:
Might want to take a quick hydro reading. You wouldn't be the first person to miss a fast ferment. Although, if you are like me, you check the thing on the hour every hour.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna pick up some S-05 over lunch, and check it when I get home. If it has taken off today then no problem, but if not I'll check the SG before I re-pitch. I'm pretty confident that there was nothing going on in there as of this morning, though.

And to mirror the sentiments of others, while it *CAN* take 72 hours, that doesn't mean it should or that your beer won't be affected. That's 3 days that infections can grow, and that's way too long for my preference. Add in the fact that I've never seen Notty take more than 12 hours to take off before, and it's just bothersome. Notty doesn't do anything special that worth waiting that long and risking your batch when you've got perfectly reliable alternatives.
 
jmo88 said:
That thread bothers me a bit. If the yeast is healthy, the pitch rate and temperature was appropriate, a normal beer should be practically finished fermenting at 72 hours. If it's Tuesday morning and I dint see activity on a Sunday's brew, i'd worry too.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree, and so does that thread--it notes that "If you follow correct and advised procedures then I say most brews see activity in 6 to 18 hours."

But there's a difference between the sort of problem where you should think "Next time, I need to make sure I'm aerating well, pitching enough viable yeast, and have the wort at an appropriate temperature, because this isn't ideal" and "OMG, I need to pitch more yeast into this beer!".

A 36-hour lag from Sunday evening to Tuesday morning is in the former category, but it's a ways away from panicking and repitching IMO.

If things are still looking dead on Wednesday and the hydro says the fermentation didn't sneak past you, then's the time to consider pitching again.
 
BTW, there absolutely are bacteria in your carboy that are rapidly reproducing. I've accidentally grown bacteria in some well-sanitized equipment... they are there if you didn't actually sterilize by autoclave or similar.

It is a race against time... how quickly the bacteria grow vs. how fast the yeast create alcohol and poison the bacteria.

In 3 days the bacteria have gotten a big head start. I had my bad experience with Notty and will never go there again.
 
Well, wish I had seen this thread last week...

Went to LHBS dropped ~$35 on ingredients, wanted US-05, but they were out...

Brewed Friday afternoon... pitched

Lot No. 1087117102 EXP 06-2011 Made in Denmark

As of Monday morning... Nothing.

Came home tonight (monday night) surface almost has a layer of bubbles

Also yeast icebergs....

"that's odd" so I search to see if this is a normal Nottingham characteristic... find this thread... go out to the trash luckily the yeast packet was against the side of the bag so it was easy to get to... (and wasn't in the bag with the chicken remains from a little grilling)

I cut the packet open and there are at least 6 holes in the lot number and expiration date that are clearly visible when I hold a flashlight against the packet.

I pulled the stopper out and took a sniff... it smelled ok, so I have hope. In the 72 hours that it took to start, hopefully nothing else took hold, but I am not a happy camper right now.

I'm going to get into contact with Danstar and also bring the packet by my LHBS and show them the wonderful perforated packet...
 
PorterIdontknowher said:
Well, wish I had seen this thread last week...

Went to LHBS dropped ~$35 on ingredients, wanted US-05, but they were out...

Brewed Friday afternoon... pitched

Lot No. 1087117102 EXP 06-2011 Made in Denmark

As of Monday morning... Nothing.

Came home tonight (monday night) surface almost has a layer of bubbles

Also yeast icebergs....

"that's odd" so I search to see if this is a normal Nottingham characteristic... find this thread... go out to the trash luckily the yeast packet was against the side of the bag so it was easy to get to... (and wasn't in the bag with the chicken remains from a little grilling)

I cut the packet open and there are at least 6 holes in the lot number and expiration date that are clearly visible when I hold a flashlight against the packet.

I pulled the stopper out and took a sniff... it smelled ok, so I have hope. In the 72 hours that it took to start, hopefully nothing else took hold, but I am not a happy camper right now.

I'm going to get into contact with Danstar and also bring the packet by my LHBS and show them the wonderful perforated packet...
Click to expand...

Definitely write them - that's the same lot I had trouble with and they said they hadn't heard of any problems with it. They blamed it on "something" that must have happened to it in transit to me. Maybe if enough people tell them they'll believe it. They did send me some replacement packets, but I doubt I'll use them since they obviously have a problem they haven't identified (or at least admitted) much less solved.
 
I sent them an email and I was able to get a photo with a flashlight behind the packet that actually showed the light coming out from the numbers...

In a dark room, I can see 20+ holes, but 4 of them were big enough that at the limits of what I could do with an f1.8 lens handheld I could get them to show up... I guess I could have upped the ISO setting, but I didn't think of it at the time...

besides the punctures at the lot number, there is also a similar sized hole at the edge of the packet where it looks like the back panel got slightly kinked before sealing and the foil got a hole at the inside edge when it was sealed.
 
I still wont give them my business. They sent me replacement packets but the printing still looks ratty and there are imprints on the lot number. I just can't trust them. N_G
 
nutty_gnome said:
I still wont give them my business. They sent me replacement packets but the printing still looks ratty and there are imprints on the lot number. I just can't trust them. N_G
Click to expand...


I have to agree, as I said in my e-mail to them. Replacement packs are not really going to fix the problem for anyone who loses a batch from the issue, so I would hope they would do everything in their power to prevent that from happening. Instead, when this first came up they were slow to admit the problem and then claimed that it was limited to one batch and had been fixed. The many reports here and elsewhere since then indicate that is not the case, and they are again denying there's a problem until it gets too big to ignore. When I wrote them they didn't seem interested in any details, and made no effort at all to figure out what might be going on - they just told me I didn't have that "one bad batch" and that the problem was likely someone else's fault (shipper, LHBS, etc.). I think they feel like offering free replacements even while saying it isn't their problem counts as generous - maybe it will get them lots of false complaints looking for free yeast, but it won't win back anyone who has actually has experienced the problem.
 
Well, on the good side, tonight the krausen looks normal... so I guess to paraphrase Miracle Max... the yeast was only mostly dead, which means partly alive. I'm holding out hope that the beer will be fine despite the massive underpitching. (keeping fingers crossed)

Still, It took 90 hours to get to the stage that my other brews reached in under 30 hours, most in under 18.

The holes in the packet are obviously a problem, I was just lucky that they might not have been enough to ruin my particular batch. 24 hours post-email and I have not heard back from Danstar as yet.
 
I think someone posted that they changed the printer to laser/ink instead of that stamp. I've only used it once and the stamping was really heavily imprinted. I lucked out though, fermented fine. Still kind of shocked that they could let something like that happen, really, stamping dates on thin foil packages of a highly perishable product?
 
smizak said:
I think someone posted that they changed the printer to laser/ink instead of that stamp. I've only used it once and the stamping was really heavily imprinted. I lucked out though, fermented fine. Still kind of shocked that they could let something like that happen, really, stamping dates on thin foil packages of a highly perishable product?
Click to expand...

Correct. The new packaging is inked on not stamped. Some of the replacement packets they sent me for my troubles were from a different lot than their admitted problem batch and those were stamped and some of those have been duds too. Thankfully they sent me a bunch so if one turns out to be a dud the next day, I pitch an inked one in and it usually takes off.
 
Damn, where was this topic when I was planning this beer?

I just emailed Danstar with a picture of the package with the lot number and expiration date with a link to this post again. Hopefully they will reply to the email and possibly post again on this thread...

In the meantime, others who have used this yeast: Should I pitch another yeast or wait it out?
 
depends... which lot number?

If its the one I had, give it 18 hours and if there aren't signs of fermentation, pitch something else.

I got a response to my email saying that while the flashlight test shows holes, the foil is punctured, but not the lining on the inside. However, my brew took 72 hours to show signs of fermentation. However, after all the stress and teeth gnashing it may be ok... Ive still got my fingers crossed.
 
Daddymem said:
.... Some of the replacement packets they sent me for my troubles were from a different lot than their admitted problem batch and those were stamped and some of those have been duds too. ....
Click to expand...

This is what they sent to me as well and it is completely unacceptable. They will not get my business again. N_G
 
PorterIdontknowher said:
depends... which lot number?

If its the one I had, give it 18 hours and if there aren't signs of fermentation, pitch something else.

I got a response to my email saying that while the flashlight test shows holes, the foil is punctured, but not the lining on the inside. However, my brew took 72 hours to show signs of fermentation. However, after all the stress and teeth gnashing it may be ok... Ive still got my fingers crossed.
Click to expand...

I am at 72 hours now. I am thinking of repitching some American Ale yeast from a prior batch I did with Safale S-05...
 
PorterIdontknowher said:
depends... which lot number?

If its the one I had, give it 18 hours and if there aren't signs of fermentation, pitch something else.

I got a response to my email saying that while the flashlight test shows holes, the foil is punctured, but not the lining on the inside. However, my brew took 72 hours to show signs of fermentation. However, after all the stress and teeth gnashing it may be ok... Ive still got my fingers crossed.
Click to expand...

My info was also:
Lot No. 1087117102 EXP 06-2011 Made in Denmark
 
Their email back to me said that while it fails the flashlight test, it still should be fine. Nothing wrong with the lot... yeah right... they offered to send me a few sachets to make up for it... I might use them, but I'll have a backup of US-05 or S-04 and do a careful inspection of the packet after opening it...

I pitched mine around 3 pm on a Friday. Monday morning, still nothing. Monday when I came home from work, light krausen with islands of yeast... Then I found this thread... thought about pitching more yeast, but had none, LHBS closed.

Tuesday night, come home from work, normal krausen except the huge rafts of yeast on top... still smells normal... will venture a taste tomorrow when i rack it to secondary...
 
PorterIdontknowher said:
Their email back to me said that while it fails the flashlight test, it still should be fine. Nothing wrong with the lot... yeah right... they offered to send me a few sachets to make up for it... I might use them, but I'll have a backup of US-05 or S-04 and do a careful inspection of the packet after opening it...

I pitched mine around 3 pm on a Friday. Monday morning, still nothing. Monday when I came home from work, light krausen with islands of yeast... Then I found this thread... thought about pitching more yeast, but had none, LHBS closed.

Tuesday night, come home from work, normal krausen except the huge rafts of yeast on top... still smells normal... will venture a taste tomorrow when i rack it to secondary...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I came home tonight and had the same thing, a layer of foam on top of my wort (it was still wort...). Hopefully when I wake up I will have the distinctive krausen, but man, taking that long is a risky business. That is a lot of time with 0 alcohol, no O2 purge, and no yeast activity to ward off the nasties...

I started a starter of US-05. Still contemplating pitching that in...
 
Well... I racked my beer to secondary. The good news... no horrible off tastes...

the bad news... I didn't take a gravity reading until after i moved it, and its at 1.017...

This is a Scottish 80/- that started at 1.051... I guess I can wait and see if it attenuates more and if not figure out what to do in a week or two. But at least I haven't completely wasted $35 of ingredients (yet).

Edit: Well I changed my mind... since I was brewing a batch of graff and I had a US-05 starter (second generation, made from the yeast cake of an earlier batch), I decided to pitch some of the US-05 starter into the Scottish...
 
dragonlor20 said:
My info was also:
Lot No. 1087117102 EXP 06-2011 Made in Denmark
Click to expand...

This is just wonderful, I'm halfway thru making a 10 gallon batch of centennial blonde and I also have the same replacement yeast. I have to use because I can't get anything else right now. I'm going to be pissed if these are bad too. I already lost 10 gallons of pale ale because of the bad yeast and now the replacements they sent me could be bad. I really wish I didn't log on today.
 
As I mentioned above, my 80/- was at 1.017 when I moved it to secondary.

Well, after pitching 2/3 cup of a US-05 starter last week into it, I had a small raft of bubbles form on the surface and persist most of this week. I'll take a gravity reading later this week, but it looks like its going to be alright.

Also, I got several replacement packets of Nottingham in the mail yesterday. They definitely have a different style of printing for the packet lot numbers.

Lot 1080961099V Exp 12/2011 is the new printing style and looks like it should be good... however, in the words of Ronald Regan, I will "trust but verify" I'll use them, but make a starter first...
 
Not pleased with the Nottingham changes. I got a bunch of replacement packages and have been using them. The inked version of the packets. Sometimes they take off normally, sometimes they lag 24 hours. Whatever they did to Nottingham, I wish they'd go back to the way it was before.
 
My first use of Nottingham was last Sunday, still no activity in the fermenter on Wednesday. Lot number 1080961099V exp 12.2011. I'm relatively experienced and did everything right and to Danstars rehydration instructions. Anyone else having problems with this lot number?
 
I am not sure which lot number I had, but I pitched two hyrdrated packets into 1.075 bastard clone, activity in two hours and down to 1.015 after two days at 66 degrees. WOW
 
That's awesome performance! I brewed the Centennial Blonde because I needed a session beer done fast. Some reported it done in a week or two and fermented out in 4 days. I'm 3 days in and nothing has happened yet, not exactly what I had in mind.
 
I always loved Nottingham yeast for my pale ales. But when the troubles started, I went out and stocked up on Safale 04 and 05. Now I'm down to my last packet. I figured that this issued would be solved by now. I can't believe that this is still unsettled.
 
What I would suggest is making 2-L starters for each satchel of Nottingham you have and observe the lag time. If the yeast takes off normally and the starter tastes ok, wash that yeast and use it for future brews. If it doesn't take off normally or tastes funky, throw it out. If you are not used to what starter beer tastes like, you could very lightly hop it, although that makes washing the yeast a bit more of a pain.

Notes: Obviously, this only makes sense for people who really like Nottingham over other dry yeasts, since there is plenty of extra work involved. I also know that it's not usually recommended to do starters with dry yeasts, but this is the easiest way to do a viability/vitality test.
 
Ricand said:
My first use of Nottingham was last Sunday, still no activity in the fermenter on Wednesday. Lot number 1080961099V exp 12.2011. I'm relatively experienced and did everything right and to Danstars rehydration instructions. Anyone else having problems with this lot number?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I used the same lot number, but I know my expiration date was the same for a batch of Centennial Blonde I brewed last Friday. Just one packet re-hydrated, and in it went. I had to use an Ale Pale because my carboy's are in use, but there was airlock activity within 12 hours. It went steady for 3-4 days at 62-65F, and stopped any noticeable activity on Tuesday. I'll be popping the lid this weekend for a gravity check, but I think the batch of Knotty was fine.

When I get home I'll double check the lot number for you.
 

Similar threads

Tony B
Overbuild starter from dry yeast
Replies
8
Views
716
fluketamer
F
K
single pitch for double batch?
Replies
0
Views
216
kennyconley0269
K
F
Liquid yeast - am I missing something?
2 3
Replies
98
Views
4K
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Zippy123
2565 at 76F?
Replies
7
Views
590
Bobo1898
B
Ali01
Need advice on brewing my first big beer, a Baltic porter
Replies
1
Views
467
mac_1103
mac_1103

Latest posts

Back
Top