Bad Nottingham Experiment with Pics

[Memorex88]

I still think it has something to do with the way they STAMP the lot and date on the packets. Until they change this practice, I won't/haven't taken a chance on notty anymore.

Look at the pictures here --> https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/nottingham-yeast-128940/index6.html#post1582423

 

[Rover]

Sure! Yoop was just cleaning up the stupidity. That's over with now, hopefully.

I guess the stupidity isn't over yet.

I've used yeast from this lot 3 times now. 1 pack from the LHBS, 2 packs from Brewmaster's Warehouse. All three beers have fermented just fine with no rehydration/proofing/stupidness.

With posts like this one the direction of this thread will continue. What dwarven_stout is suggesting here is that anyone that's having a problem with this yeast is doing something stupid.

I was just following the directions of on the back of the packet, and rehydrating. If that's wrong, and the basis of this problem, then Danstar should change the directions on the packet.

I too apologize if my "+1" post offended anyone. All I was doing was agreeing with someone that a poster was being offensive.

 

[mullenite]

I guess the stupidity isn't over yet.


With posts like this one the direction of this thread will continue. What dwarven_stout is suggesting here is that anyone that's having a problem with this yeast is doing something stupid.

I was just following the directions of on the back of the packet, and rehydrating. If that's wrong, and the basis of this problem, then Danstar should change the directions on the packet.

I too apologize if my "+1" post offended anyone. All I was doing was agreeing with someone that a poster was being offensive.

Er, I don't think that's what he is suggesting at all. I think he is suggesting that the distinction between proofing and rehydration is stupid in this discussion.

 

[Rover]

Er, I don't think that's what he is suggesting at all. I think he is suggesting that the distinction between proofing and rehydration is stupid in this discussion.

It sounds to me like the way he does it by not rehydrating or proofing is the better way to do it. That's why his way is working

 

[Sean]

I still think it has something to do with the way they STAMP the lot and date on the packets. Until they change this practice, I won't/haven't taken a chance on notty anymore.

Look at the pictures here --> https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/nottingham-yeast-128940/index6.html#post1582423

Dry yeast is so hard to kill, it just does't seem like a little air/moisture in the packet would kill it dead. Slow it down a bit at the start, but not kill it. I have used half pack of bread yeast and closed the top with tape and used the other half a few months later with no problem.

It is multiple people from multiple locations so it is def a problem. But always in the past dry yeast is as reliable as sugar. It just always works. So I probably just shot myself in the foot and my next batch will not start!!

 

[dwarven_stout]

Er, I don't think that's what he is suggesting at all. I think he is suggesting that the distinction between proofing and rehydration is stupid in this discussion.

Yup.

 

[RavenChief]

I have come to the conclusion that I really do need to rehydrate and "proof" my yeast. From this day forward I have a new plan. ( my plan in no way implies that anyone who has an alternate way of doing things is doing anything wrong, it's just what I have determined that I need to do to keep my sanity.) From now on, I will rehydrate in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations. I will then add 1 teaspoon of sugar (disolved in a 1/4 cup of water) to my rehydrated yeast solution. I will ensure my water is not to hot and not too cold. About 85 degrees is good. If my yeast does not foam up (proof) within 30 minutes, I will dump it and start over with a fresh sachet of yeast. I will keep extra yeast sachets on hand for this purpose. If it's good I will pitch it directly into my brew bucket.

BTW - here is a link with a good picture of what a good proofing yeast looks like,

http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter6-5.html

I know that I would also be safe making a "starter" but that involves more forethought than I am likely to be able to do consistantly.

 

[soundsandsuds]

I mentioned the bad batch to my LHBS when I went to pick up some other yeast for repitching.

They mentioned that it's easier to mess up the yeast by following Danstar's instructions on the package. They said that rehydrating at the top end of their recommended temperature range tends to kill the yeast, especially if a lot of water is used; because it takes longer to cool down. They suggested that pitching dry is more reliable.
That said, I pitched towards the bottom of the suggested temperature range, so that wasn't my problem.
If problems are caused by following the manufacturer's instructions then that's not operator error. We should be able to follow the manufacturer's suggestions and receive the intended results. It's not really reasonable to suggest that people are idiots for following the instructions on the package.

 

[Rover]

Yup.

Er, sorry then
I must have had a few too many

 

[stevedasleeve]

You might want to read this:

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

It solves the Nottingham problem (apparently it is technique related, and experience results in good fermentation.)

 

[Germelli1]

He did wait 72 hours with no change in specific gravity...

 

[SteveM]

You might want to read this:

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

It solves the Nottingham problem (apparently it is technique related, and experience results in good fermentation.)

Do a quick search of this forum for threads on Nottingham. The problems are well documented going back at least a year and not just by a bunch of noob brewers who don't understand that it takes time for fermenting to launch. The fact that some Nottingham yeast is OK doesn't take away from the fact that they shipped a lot of bad product. That thread and wisdom gets quoted at the beginning and throughout every one of these Nottingham threads.

 

[skidaddytn]

It probably was a sub par packet. I have used nottingham 4 times and it has started in 4 hours. I have even proofed it before and it has shown activity in 30 minutes. I did once have a problem with danstar Munich taking 4 days to start. In this case I did rehydrate and proof and it did fail.

So far Nottingham hasn't let me down. When it works it makes a good product I guess.

 

[ronstar55]

I just asked you experts for help with my yeast problem in "No airlock bubbling". I got a few good pointers there. I brewed about 42 hours ago. No fermentation so far. Then I read this thread. I used exactly the same yeast as the op - same lot. i'm such a newbie (3 batches) that I assumed I was the problem. Maybe its the yeast. What is the time window for repitching? I wont be able to get any new yeast until tomorrow which will put it at about 72 hours

 

[Germelli1]

Ronstar, just to make sure you are clear, the problem with the yeast is not that it won't ferment. The problem is that it takes a very long time (relatively) to start/complete fermentation.

You will most likely be ok if you let the yeast sit and allow them to get their lazy asses in gear.

This is still a big issue with the yeast, so don't think I am downplaying the issue! I just want to make sure you are aware of the potential issues

 

[ronstar55]

Ronstar, just to make sure you are clear, the problem with the yeast is not that it won't ferment. The problem is that it takes a very long time (relatively) to start/complete fermentation.

You will most likely be ok if you let the yeast sit and allow them to get their lazy asses in gear.

This is still a big issue with the yeast, so don't think I am downplaying the issue! I just want to make sure you are aware of the potential issues

Thanks! I'll wait a while.

 

[Germelli1]

Thanks! I'll wait a while.

Also many people have found that when the manufacturer stamped the date on the the yeast packet, some of the letter-stamps penetrated the wall of the packet entirely. If you still have your packet laying around I would reccomend you see if that was an issue with yours.

 

[ronstar55]

Also many people have found that when the manufacturer stamped the date on the the yeast packet, some of the letter-stamps penetrated the wall of the packet entirely. If you still have your packet laying around I would reccomend you see if that was an issue with yours.

Thanks - just checked and my packet is penetration free.

 

[Sean]

In my opinion ronstar, if it has not started in 48 hours, I would re-pitch. Possibly with a different brand. The longer the wort sits unfermenting the larger the chance you will get off flavors specifically and other un-lovelies. Remember proper sanitation.

It only costs a couple bucks, and gives you peace of mind. Otherwise, How long do you wait? 4 days, 5 days? Just do it!!: )

 

[ronstar55]

I finally started airlock activity somewhere between 48 and 58 hours. In the future I'll have more yeast to pitch on standby in case this problem happens again.