I'm not a fan of White Labs 565. I've used it twice and dumped both batches. Just dumped one last week as a matter of fact. Straight from the fermentor (aged 5 months) into the yard. Too many esters for me.
yeast to avoid?
- Thread starter dcp27
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
MachineShopBrewing
Well-Known Member
Hah, Yeah, I wonder how many people who poo-poo a yeast strain are actually using proper pitching rates/temp control?
nutty_gnome
Well-Known Member
I completely agree.
ao125
Well-Known Member
True... but wouldn't you like to have an idea before hand, which ones are bat$h1t crazy? Not saying crazy is bad... but having an idea of which yeasts smell funny, are needy, or take your money and destroy your stuff sounds like a good thing to me.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2011
- Messages
- 3,032
- Reaction score
- 283
I've had rather slow starts in my starters of Wyeast 1187 (Ringwood), however when I pitched the proper rates, no problems there. It's a VERY fruity/flavorful yeast. I used it to ferment a standard blonde ale... It fooled my brewclub members into thinking it was very hopped... It wasn't. It's the 1187.
M_C
M_C
Which yeasts to avoid? The ones that are out-of-date 
Slightly more seriously, it's more a matter of adjusting your expectations and maybe your recipe than thinking a given strain is 'good' or 'bad'. I recently tried 1098 (British Ale) in an IPA for the first time and was disappointed. It didn't attenuate as well as I would have liked and finished sweet compared to 1028. If you look at Wyeast's docs, they indicate the attenuation is a little lower. Had I thought about it, I might have tweaked my recipe either by mashing a little lower or adding sugar or both.
Similarly, I have sworn off of 3056 because it doesn't have as much banana and clove as I would like, but there's nothing wrong with it. It just doesn't do what I like for my weizens.
Slightly more seriously, it's more a matter of adjusting your expectations and maybe your recipe than thinking a given strain is 'good' or 'bad'. I recently tried 1098 (British Ale) in an IPA for the first time and was disappointed. It didn't attenuate as well as I would have liked and finished sweet compared to 1028. If you look at Wyeast's docs, they indicate the attenuation is a little lower. Had I thought about it, I might have tweaked my recipe either by mashing a little lower or adding sugar or both.
Similarly, I have sworn off of 3056 because it doesn't have as much banana and clove as I would like, but there's nothing wrong with it. It just doesn't do what I like for my weizens.
Laikacosmonaut
Well-Known Member
Surprised no one has mentioned Wyeast 3724 yet... Belgian Saison... Unless you live in the 9th circle of hell, you won't have enough heat to keep this beast happy.
Fermenter finally stopped this morning, but we're into the 3 week mark and I had my eye on this brew for a competition at the end of June... We'll see how it cleans up with a little time, but I'm afraid this is cutting it close.
Note: Yeast is by far my favorite Saison-wise, nice and tart from what I've tasted, but it was a real uphill battle getting this thing to ferment out, which is the major complication. I heard the stories, but always have it in my mind that I'm special and these rules do not apply to me. Egg, meet face. :fro:
Fermenter finally stopped this morning, but we're into the 3 week mark and I had my eye on this brew for a competition at the end of June... We'll see how it cleans up with a little time, but I'm afraid this is cutting it close.
Note: Yeast is by far my favorite Saison-wise, nice and tart from what I've tasted, but it was a real uphill battle getting this thing to ferment out, which is the major complication. I heard the stories, but always have it in my mind that I'm special and these rules do not apply to me. Egg, meet face. :fro:
Freerent
Member
I am going to post my positive results:
S-04: does really real in Imperial Stouts
WL001: is my old standby. Great all purpose yeast.
Finally, Wy1945: works well in Tripels.
S-04: does really real in Imperial Stouts
WL001: is my old standby. Great all purpose yeast.
Finally, Wy1945: works well in Tripels.
HappyHeadBrew
Member
Go to for nearly all American ales: US-05/WLP001 (I prefer Safale simply because a starter is not necessary). This is the yeast we use for every IPA, Pale Ale, and Amber... and it always does the trick!
I recently gave Danstar Nottingham a try and won't be doing that again. Admittedly fermented a tad too warm (73F), which led to a jet fuel like experience, but the batch I had sitting next to it used US-05 and came out fine. I see no reason to use any other dry yeast except Fermentis products.
I recently gave Danstar Nottingham a try and won't be doing that again. Admittedly fermented a tad too warm (73F), which led to a jet fuel like experience, but the batch I had sitting next to it used US-05 and came out fine. I see no reason to use any other dry yeast except Fermentis products.
BrewThruYou
Well-Known Member
I might stay away from WLP002 in the future.
First issue is that it's so flocculent, it's really hard to wash.
Second issue is that I tried to make a Little Sumpin' Sumpin' clone with it...maybe too much yeast got into the bottles. But when I pour it into a glass, the yeast flocs together and rides up and down the glass with the carbonation...it looks pretty disgusting when these tiny chunks of yeast and getting thrown around the glass.
First issue is that it's so flocculent, it's really hard to wash.
Second issue is that I tried to make a Little Sumpin' Sumpin' clone with it...maybe too much yeast got into the bottles. But when I pour it into a glass, the yeast flocs together and rides up and down the glass with the carbonation...it looks pretty disgusting when these tiny chunks of yeast and getting thrown around the glass.
Crustovsky
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2011
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 1
But seriously folks, no I've just not been impressed by what I've heard about those strains in particular.
I'd use WLP023 again... maybe. I and a friend of mine have had bad experiences with it though.
Both of us made adequate starters and used temp control and both of us had the yeast just stop and get a stuck fermentation.
The problem is mine it happened on the high end of the terminal gravity so after about 4 days of the same gravity I figured it was done, moved it to secondary for a month (imperial stout that I was aging on oak chips) and then bottled... and now the damn thing gushes out of the bottles because the sugar woke the yeast up and it ate what it left behind the first time, the thing is rather over carbonated and at first I thought I had a gusher bug until my friend had a similar thing happen with this yeast. We've both sworn off it for anything above 1.060
Both of us made adequate starters and used temp control and both of us had the yeast just stop and get a stuck fermentation.
The problem is mine it happened on the high end of the terminal gravity so after about 4 days of the same gravity I figured it was done, moved it to secondary for a month (imperial stout that I was aging on oak chips) and then bottled... and now the damn thing gushes out of the bottles because the sugar woke the yeast up and it ate what it left behind the first time, the thing is rather over carbonated and at first I thought I had a gusher bug until my friend had a similar thing happen with this yeast. We've both sworn off it for anything above 1.060
bottlebomber
Well-Known Member
jeffjm said:
Whats that?
SwampassJ
Well-Known Member
I don't like Nottinghams dryness or flavor profile.
bottlebomber
Well-Known Member
jeffjm said:
Something that you would do in a bucket rather than a carboy? I guess you could try to syphon, but it would be hard with all the air...
I have to agree on the #1010. I tried this twice and the only word I can find to describe it is boring. I guess I'm more of a wlp380 type of guy.
Wy 3068. I've had enough clove and/or banana in this lifetime. Not the yeast's fault really: that's what it's supposed to do. I just can't stomach G. hefe any more.
user 70770
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2011
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 29
I will never brew with Nottingham. I brew once every other month so it's too much a gamble to see if the brew will ferment cleanly or taste infected.
I also avoid the fuller's strain (WLP 002 or Wyeast 1968) for two reasons. First, I found it a bit difficult to handle. It tends to flocc out if you just look at it wrong and the attenuation is totally underwhelming even by British ales standards. The ester profile is also a bit weird if fermented at anything above 68F. And secondly, I have never been able to achieve the fuller's flavor. It's always turned out way fruitier than fuller's even when fermented cool.
My go to yeast right now is Whitbread 1099. Nice malt and ester profile. It's also fairly clean at lower temperatures. Attenuation is advertised as a bit lower, but I've had success with good attenuation with proper mash handling. It's just a nice flexible yeast imho.
I also avoid the fuller's strain (WLP 002 or Wyeast 1968) for two reasons. First, I found it a bit difficult to handle. It tends to flocc out if you just look at it wrong and the attenuation is totally underwhelming even by British ales standards. The ester profile is also a bit weird if fermented at anything above 68F. And secondly, I have never been able to achieve the fuller's flavor. It's always turned out way fruitier than fuller's even when fermented cool.
My go to yeast right now is Whitbread 1099. Nice malt and ester profile. It's also fairly clean at lower temperatures. Attenuation is advertised as a bit lower, but I've had success with good attenuation with proper mash handling. It's just a nice flexible yeast imho.
jjones17
Well-Known Member
I second this - I made the all time worst beer ever with that yeast, and not bragging here but pretty much all my beers have turned out quaffable at worst.
Also, S-23 I hated.
Though OP - the only liquid strains I disliked were, funny as it is, from the discount bin at the LHBS. I can attest that it was because I did not use Mr-Malty at the time, and did not step up my starters enough. I still would avoid really old liquid yeast just based on the cost of DME used to step up your starter like 3-4 times to get enough yeast for a good 5 Gallon batch.
iasquith
Well-Known Member
The only two that I'd never use again are Winsdor and S-33 I gave up after repeatedly finishing up with high FG's and way too estery\ nosy esp.(windsor)
rgarcia78147
Active Member
By far the the worst yeast ever: WLP002 English Ale Yeast, Wyeast 2565 Kolsch, Dry Windsor Yeast!!!!!!!!
The three best i have ever used WLP060 American Ale Yeast Blend, WLP029 German/Kolsch Yeast, Wyeast 1469 West Yorkshire Ale
Best Lager yeast: WLP838 Southern German, and WLP810 San Francisco Yeast!!!!!
The three best i have ever used WLP060 American Ale Yeast Blend, WLP029 German/Kolsch Yeast, Wyeast 1469 West Yorkshire Ale
Best Lager yeast: WLP838 Southern German, and WLP810 San Francisco Yeast!!!!!
beergolf
Well-Known Member
This is so true. Pitching a good healthy starter and controling temp is the key.
Perfect example..... Get the temps right and it is a fantastic yeast. I put my fermenter in a cooler with water and an aquarium heater. Get the temps right. I just checked my last brew, at two weeks it is already down to 1.004. Never had aroblem with this yeast.
thegerm
Well-Known Member
That's probably because fuller's fermentation schedule is psycho. that and partigyle. most sane homebrewers don't do either. the yeast is an all-star in the appropriate beers, however.
Here's the fuller's fermentation schedule that I got from the interview with the master brewer from the original fuller's can you brew it interview:
pitch at 17C
raise to 20C over 10 hours.
hold at 20C for 30 hours (half gravity).
chill to 17 over 3 hours.
hold at 17 till 1/4 to 1/5 gravity.
chill to 6 (1C/hour) over 11 hours.
hold at 6 for 36 hours.
rack off yeast.
raise to 20C over 10 hours.
hold at 20C for 30 hours (half gravity).
chill to 17 over 3 hours.
hold at 17 till 1/4 to 1/5 gravity.
chill to 6 (1C/hour) over 11 hours.
hold at 6 for 36 hours.
rack off yeast.
I wanted to attempt this schedule but I was sort of forced to bring the temp of the carboy up to room temp at the end of fermentation due to kegerator constraints... so I think that allowed the yeast to eat up some of those esters that would have otherwise remained in the beer if I'd kept the temp down. Also, just fermenting at a constant 68F gives a fine result as well.
Another year into this thread; must be time for another post. I still haven't found any yeasts that I truly hate. I guess I wasn't a fan of the PC Wyeast Thames Valley II, but that was my fault for not doing a long enough d-rest with a couple of batches made with that yeast. The batch that was on the yeast for a month turned out fine.
I know lager yeasts a bit better than I know ale yeasts. W-34/70 is my workhorse strain, has a big temperature range where it works effectively, and my beers fermented with it have brought home a dozen medals (and counting) in competition in 2012. S-189 is not that easy to get but is a nice, if somewhat maltier, yeast as well. It's done well for me in competition too, even in styles it was not suited to. Some people are leery about S-23 but I've done a couple Bohemian Pilsners with it (one fermented cool, one warm) that have also done well this year. I think it's a real winner for lager brewers who want/have to ferment on the warmer side due to lack of temperature control or whatever.
I like S-05 (1056) and Wyeast 1728 for ales. Clean, flocculant, attenuative. I'm turned off British-style beers but if I had to make one S-04 would be my choice although I don't know much about the liquid British strains.
I'm really not into wheat beers or Belgians. I should brew a few a year just to have for competitions.
I know lager yeasts a bit better than I know ale yeasts. W-34/70 is my workhorse strain, has a big temperature range where it works effectively, and my beers fermented with it have brought home a dozen medals (and counting) in competition in 2012. S-189 is not that easy to get but is a nice, if somewhat maltier, yeast as well. It's done well for me in competition too, even in styles it was not suited to. Some people are leery about S-23 but I've done a couple Bohemian Pilsners with it (one fermented cool, one warm) that have also done well this year. I think it's a real winner for lager brewers who want/have to ferment on the warmer side due to lack of temperature control or whatever.
I like S-05 (1056) and Wyeast 1728 for ales. Clean, flocculant, attenuative. I'm turned off British-style beers but if I had to make one S-04 would be my choice although I don't know much about the liquid British strains.
I'm really not into wheat beers or Belgians. I should brew a few a year just to have for competitions.
There's no 'bad yeast', just bad brewers. This thread is perfect evidence of that.
SwampassJ
Well-Known Member
You're right. My taste buds telling me I don't like Nottingham in anything is my fault for not liking it's taste.
I don't like ketchup, but it doesn't mean ketchup is bad, it just means I, personally, don't care for it. Not saying it's your fault that you don't like what Notty imparts in a beer (I think it sucks, too), but it's not the yeast's fault either. 
+1
I've had yeast that I don't care for the flavor of and I've had yeast that needs more attention than others but all yeast, in my experience, do what they are supposed to. The finicky one's tend to have unique flavor profiles that are worth the effort to me. The only yeast I've had that really pissed me off was old. I made a starter according to mr. malty and followed my fermentation profile and it just didn't do what I wanted it to. I suspect the viability was near zero. I've used the yeast since, with a fresher smack pack, and had great results. The yeast was 3787, but it wasn't the yeast's fault it was the bargain bin that was at fault.
agreed!I actually had a yeast really chap my a$$ one day. I brewed up this batch of beer, OG 1.087, didn't aerate, pitched one smack pack at 95 degrees and placed it under a south window in a 80 degree room. For the next three weeks I screamed and hollered at those little buggers to do their f'n job. When I went to bottle the beer, it tasted like crap, gave me a headache and no matter how many times I dumped corn sugar into the bottles, they were still flat the next day when I tried them. Then they exploded. I'll never use XXXX yeast again.
No, really, there's no bad yeast, just bad brewers.
NordeastBrewer77 said:
I actually had a yeast really chap my a$$ one day. I brewed up this batch of beer, OG 1.087, didn't aerate, pitched one smack pack at 95 degrees and placed it under a south window in a 80 degree room. For the next three weeks I screamed and hollered at those little buggers to do their f'n job. When I went to bottle the beer, it tasted like crap, gave me a headache and no matter how many times I dumped corn sugar into the bottles, they were still flat the next day when I tried them. Then they exploded. I'll never use XXXX yeast again.
No, really, there's no bad yeast, just bad brewers.
Haha true. Every strain has its place whether you like them or not.
On that note... I use notingham all the time and have had very good results in IPA's and such. Windsor has also worked well and S58 has made some very tasty Belgian doubles. S33 I had some issues with, didn't like the esters. But I used it in a chocolate stout and it came out really well. These are all dry yeasts but I'm moving into liquid yeasts and starters et all because I want to try out a bit more variety. So I may cone back and say that the abbey yeast I'm pitching in a couple of days blows s58 out of the water but I suspect that it will be good in a different way. Some beers that I didn't like the profile of - my tests with S33 - my neighbors have loved so no waste, just learning.
pohldogg
Well-Known Member
It's not about bad yeast and bad brewers. Some strains just don't fit all breweries. 565 works great for me, but I pitch bugs that take advantage of it stalling out. The same goes for 1968, pretty much everything I make is mashed at 149 and I've never had an attenuation problem. That's just because they fit in with my style of brewing, not because I'm a better brewer than the folks that don't like them. Personally, 1388 and 540 don't like the way I brew. I'm sure with more research and practice I could figure them out. But I don't want to change my mash temps, aeration regimen, or fermentation process for one off batches especially when I have a number of strains that like the way I do business. Bigger fan of consistent brewing process because there's fewer areas for mistakes when I do the same thing every time.
bread yeast.
Unless of course you're baking bread.
Unless of course you're baking bread.
larrynoz said:
I bought Yorkshire Square because it's from my favorite brewery and reused it in a few different beers. Results tasted fine but the yeast tended to settle easily and I had to give the carbohydrate a shake a few times in the first weeks.
ColeBeer78
Well-Known Member
I only had one batch of yeast give me problems.... Nottingham. Never again!
