Conan Yeast Experiences

[Coff]

a few months ago, the idea that Conan was a lager strain was floated in another HT thread. the idea was shot down, by a microbiologist/lab geek if i remember correctly.

Yes, it's an ale yeast according to this post anyhow:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f12/heady-topper-can-you-clone-390082/index76.html#post5104584

Yea it was Al Buck from East Coast Yeast that confirmed that to me in an email almost a year ago. I wanted to send him some slurry but he happened to have a can of Heady handy, this is also how we know what generation he originally cultured up to start ECY29.

 

[powermd]

New Conan brew for me. It's the recipe from the Bell's two-hearted ale clone thread. I missed my target OG by about 10 points due to some efficiency issues I haven't ironed out yet. Mashed at 150F for 90 min, batch sparge, oxygenated for 2 min. Pitched at 68F, OG 1.054 (was aiming for 1.064).

I could have done a better sparge. I've also been playing around with a nylon bag for my grain to make cleanup easier, the problem with that is it doesn't sit perfectly level on the false bottom.

From my last Conan brew, I saved part of the yeast cake in two mason jars. I made a starter our of one jar (about 250 mL slurry), and let it grow in 1.040 for 48 hrs before pitching.

Lots of activity for the first 36 hours at 66F, but nothing crazy. Now it's slowed down a lot on day 3, so I'm bumping the temp to 71-72F for the next two days. I'll check a sample at the end of day 5.... (update) I checked a sample today (day 4), and we're at 1.020 (phooey). Nice hop profile, but I sure hope to shave off a few more points from the FG.

 

[braggheim]

Primary is almost complete. Super clear, but the trub and dormant yeast are wild looking. Can't wait to try my final product!

 

[jglazer]

I grew a starter of Conan about 6 months ago, I've used it for a few batches, always making a starter slightly larger than I need to so I can save a little extra so I can make another starter, and so on....and the current batch I have fermenting has stalled at 1.026, even after my attempt at re-pitching. I think this is due to a few factors, 1 the beer's OG was 1.09 so it was already a hard beer to ferment out, 2 we realized we were out of oxygen when we were about to use it..., and 3 the yeast was left in the fridge for a bit too long and my starter calculations were off resulting in some degree of under-pitching.

Just some more info to add to the bank

 

[Coff]

In a few weeks I will be doing a side by side with ECY29 and my original culture I froze from my first starter of Conan from 11/28/12. I just recently was able to wake it up after ~3 days in a starter.

The plan is for a SMaSH, probably Pale Malt and Zythos bc I have it on hand. I want to see if in a simple grist Pale Ale which culture attenuates the way we expect Conan to. My culture was confirmed at generation 11, and I have shared it with 5 brewers, all of which have reported 80%+ attenuation.

I'll post a full report on my blog once things get working and I have data, I am planning to have a local brewer with experience with my Conan culture and ECY29 to perform something similar.

 

[tagz]

In a few weeks I will be doing a side by side with ECY29 and my original culture I froze from my first starter of Conan from 11/28/12. I just recently was able to wake it up after ~3 days in a starter.

The plan is for a SMaSH, probably Pale Malt and Zythos bc I have it on hand. I want to see if in a simple grist Pale Ale which culture attenuates the way we expect Conan to. My culture was confirmed at generation 11, and I have shared it with 5 brewers, all of which have reported 80%+ attenuation.

I'll post a full report on my blog once things get working and I have data, I am planning to have a local brewer with experience with my Conan culture and ECY29 to perform something similar.

I'm getting the feeling that "11th generation" has become their stock answer. That's what they told me when I stopped in, and it seems like several other people have reported the same. Perhaps that's to dissuade people from using it to culture...

 

[Coff]

I'm getting the feeling that "11th generation" has become their stock answer. That's what they told me when I stopped in, and it seems like several other people have reported the same. Perhaps that's to dissuade people from using it to culture...

Interesting, I hadn't heard that. I got that number from Vegan many months ago. Maybe its wrong, but Al at ECY cultured his from a can that was a month older then mine and thats how Vegan knows the ECY generation.

I really like using Conan, but I am starting to think its not worth the hassle. If it really degrades this quickly it might not be for me, and this is after 1 year of using Conan.

 

[tagz]

That's purely speculation on my part. I've only brewed with Conan once so far but I was impressed by the performance. Hit FG in 3-4 days, dropped pretty clear with a cold crash and that peach flavor is pretty amazing. I wouldn't make it a house yeast due to the degradation issues but Ill probably run it until I notice issues and then hunt down a fresh culture.

 

[BullGator]

So I harvested some conan from a can of heady I bought from the brewery around April. I build up a starter and slanted the yeast. Around a month later, I built up a starter from the slant. My process for building starters is starting with 10ml, then around 100ml, then around 1000ml, then up to 5000ml (12 gallon batch). Each time, I pour the entire previous starter into the next. At the very end, I cold crash the starter for around 8 hours and pour off the starter "beer". The batch of heady I made cleared up pretty quick. I also do recall the heady clearing up within a month or so now that I think about it. Still got all the flavor and aroma notes discussed here but really clear beer.

I went back up to VT and grabbed a fresh heady case sometime around August. I hadn't thought too much about it but I was noticing the heady was maintaining the cloudliness longer (still cloudy to this day). So I thought I should try to grab some of this new conan because it is noticeably different. So I left a can in the fridge overnight. I poured off most of the heady and dumped the last 1/10 of the can in the flask along with wort. Here is my thought: Aside the fact that this is obviously a different generation, there is something going on that may explain the differences in flocculation over time. It would make sense that while the yeast cells are more and less the same, there may be minor differences within a particular generation or general yeast population. The more flocculent bunch tend to not hang around and drop out while the ones that are less flocculent just chill out in suspension. Now, by letting the can sit still for a long time and slowly pouring off the majority of the fluid wouldn't you be concentrating the more flocculent yeast in your starter? You then build this up and then pour off the top yet again right before pitching as I described above in my starter process (even worse if you cold crash in between starter steps). So is it possible that we may be better off grabbing the beer from the top of the can and not pouring off our starters before pitching (although the thought of this makes me cringe for some reason). Is any of this making sense?

 

[bluelakebrewing]

So essentially you're saying that the best yeast is still in suspension towards the top and that's what you plan on using since it hasn't flocked out and could be the healthiest?

 

[BullGator]

So essentially you're saying that the best yeast is still in suspension towards the top and that's what you plan on using since it hasn't flocked out and could be the healthiest?

I'm not saying they are the healthiest but what I am proposing is that they may be the yeast cells that tend to be less flocculent. Therefore, if you want that heady-like yeast cloudiness, then is this theory plausible? I am merely posing the question so more knowledgeable yeast-nerds can let me know what they think. This is by no means a statement of fact.

I should note that I am not a microbiologist or anything and this is purely based on observations combined with reading brewing books and this forum.

 

[BeerGrylls]

So essentially you're saying that the best yeast is still in suspension towards the top and that's what you plan on using since it hasn't flocked out and could be the healthiest?

So what you're saying is, "what the flocc?"

 

[LateraLex]

I would recommend never dumping a batch without seeing it thru to the bottle. At least in situations regarding fermentation temps. I say bottle it, and see how it tastes. If it doesn't taste good, then you can consider dumping. Just my thoughts....

Pleased to report back (on my batch that accidentally fermented at high 70s for 2 days), that I finished the hop schedule and kegged up a batch - and it is a fine DIPA. Definitely missing the peachy notes that I smelled while making the starter, but no off flavors. I harvested the yeast, and am now trying it with my American Amber recipe :rockin:

 

[tagz]

The peach flavor seemed to be strongest in the first step of my starter regime. I still get peach flavor in the full batch but nothing like that huge burst of juicy peach aroma from the starter. Like Belgian strains, stress seems to bring out the desirable flavor. Anyone underpitch conan?

 

[BeerGrylls]

The peach flavor seemed to be strongest in the first step of my starter regime. I still get peach flavor in the full batch but nothing like that huge burst of juicy peach aroma from the starter. Like Belgian strains, stress seems to bring out the desirable flavor. Anyone underpitch conan?

Wow I hadn't considered that. Experiments need to be done!!!

 

[theveganbrewer]

The peach flavor seemed to be strongest in the first step of my starter regime. I still get peach flavor in the full batch but nothing like that huge burst of juicy peach aroma from the starter. Like Belgian strains, stress seems to bring out the desirable flavor. Anyone underpitch conan?

The first step or two are peachy only because of the actual Heady topper that was in the starter, that's what you're smelling most likely.

 

[powermd]

New Conan brew for me yesterday:

Yellow Dog Pale Ale Clone (nostalgia for my first extract home brew years ago).
Style: APA
Grain: 9 lb 2 oz Briess 2 row, 1 lb 4 oz white wheat, 5.3 oz crystal 20L, 2 oz Briess chocolate.
Hops: 1 oz Chinook at 60, 1 oz EKG at 5, 1 oz Willamette at 0 min.
Extra: 0.85 oz bitter orange peel at 15 for fun

Mashed at 150-151 for 90, batch sparge. Unexpected 90% efficiency! Was supposed to be a 5.5 gallon batch, but I diluted to 7 gallons and adjusted hops to get gravity back on target. OG was 1.048, just off my target of 1.047.

Racked onto a 2 week old Conan yeast cake from a 5.5 gallon batch of a Bell's 2 hearted ale clone. The Bell's clone went into another carboy for some secondary fermentation and dry hopping. Gravity 1.019 so far.

MASSIVE eruption this morning that blew off the airlock. I fashioned a blowoff tube from some silicone tubing and the rubber stopper. It just fit over the little nipple for the airlock! Probably lost 1/2 gallon of beer and yeast in the first few hours out the blowoff.

 

[Brewsncrabs]

First time with Conan. Brewed a Green Flash West Coast IPa clone from CYBI. Mashed at 149-150 to 1.070OG. Fermented at 65 up to 71 degrees. After 10 days I am at 1.026! Hmmm. The yeast was from Sept. Made a starter using yeast calc. I will rouse the yeast and try to gain a few points, but if this doesnt work, I was thinking of repitching a pack of 05. If I do, should I use a whole pack, 1/2 pack? Thoughts?

12.5 lbs Pale
1.25 lbs c-40
1.25 lbs carapils

 

[powermd]

First time with Conan. Brewed a Green Flash West Coast IPa clone from CYBI. Mashed at 149-150 to 1.070OG. Fermented at 65 up to 71 degrees. After 10 days I am at 1.026! Hmmm. The yeast was from Sept. Made a starter using yeast calc. I will rouse the yeast and try to gain a few points, but if this doesnt work, I was thinking of repitching a pack of 05. If I do, should I use a whole pack, 1/2 pack? Thoughts?

12.5 lbs Pale
1.25 lbs c-40
1.25 lbs carapils

I find that under pitching seems to be the main reason I have stuck gravities with this yeast.

 

[Brewsncrabs]

I find that under pitching seems to be the main reason I have stuck gravities with this yeast.

Yes I assumed this was the cause. But my question was how much to repitch if I choose to do so with 05?

 

[powermd]

Yes I assumed this was the cause. But my question was how much to repitch if I choose to do so with 05?

You may not need to repitch.

My Bell's clone did the strangest thing the other day. I racked the Bell's, which had stalled at 1.019, to a new carboy, but accidentally sucked up a bunch of yeast goop from the bottom of the primary carboy. I set this aside to dry hop in a room with ambient temp of 74. The next day the surface was covered with a fresh layer of active yeast and it was bubbling away! It's still going today, just a bit slower. I'm hoping for 1.014 or better.

I'm guessing the racking re-oxygenation combined with a scoop of yeast was just the right combo to get fermentation restarted.

 

[LakesideBrewing]

I brewed an American Barleywine a few months ago and pitched a healthy and active 800ml slurry of Conan. My OG was 1.104 and a few months later it is 1.020. I think it is done; I have checked it 3 times in the past month and it is steady at 1.020. I am fairly happy with that. It puts the apparent attenuation at 80% and the ABV at 11%. Has anyone used Conan in a beer with a higher alcohol content? I'm wondering if I hit it's alcohol tolerance.

 

[BeerGrylls]

I brewed an American Barleywine a few months ago and pitched a healthy and active 800ml slurry of Conan. My OG was 1.104 and a few months later it is 1.020. I think it is done; I have checked it 3 times in the past month and it is steady at 1.020. I am fairly happy with that. It puts the apparent attenuation at 80% and the ABV at 11%. Has anyone used Conan in a beer with a higher alcohol content? I'm wondering if I hit it's alcohol tolerance.

Good to know it worked at that gravity. But come on, how did it taste?

 

[LakesideBrewing]

Good to know it worked at that gravity. But come on, how did it taste?

Oh, it's fantastic! :rockin: Still a little hot but it will mature nicely.

 

[sweetcell]

I brewed an American Barleywine a few months ago and pitched a healthy and active 800ml slurry of Conan. My OG was 1.104 and a few months later it is 1.020. I think it is done; I have checked it 3 times in the past month and it is steady at 1.020. I am fairly happy with that. It puts the apparent attenuation at 80% and the ABV at 11%. Has anyone used Conan in a beer with a higher alcohol content? I'm wondering if I hit it's alcohol tolerance.

i suspect that 800ml is too small a starter for such a big beer (depending on batch size, initial pitch and the freshness of the yeast). maybe the yeast would have pushed farther with a bigger pitch.

 

[sweetcell]

the mad fermentationist (oldsock) takes Conan for a spin:

Conan the IPA (and Yeast)
http://www.themadfermentationist.com/2013/11/conan-ipa-and-yeast.html

some interesting tidbits in there... "In his book IPA, Mitch Steele reports that The Alchemist uses a relatively low pitching rate (less than a .5 million cells per ml per degree plato), fermenting at 68 F for a few days then up to 72 F." (...) "For whatever reason, reports have been that the ECY culture isn’t as attenuative as many brewers expect it to be. I experienced only 71% AA in the pale ale, and have yet to take a final reading of the IPA. Luckily the pale ale doesn’t taste overly sweet or thick." Also, the BYO article about the Alchemist not using Conan is wrong: it's Hill Farmstead that isn't using Conan anymore, not the Alchemist.

 

[droder1]

The peach flavor seemed to be strongest in the first step of my starter regime. I still get peach flavor in the full batch but nothing like that huge burst of juicy peach aroma from the starter. Like Belgian strains, stress seems to bring out the desirable flavor. Anyone underpitch conan?

the Steele IPA book, the el jefe clone indicates to underpitch slightly.

 

[LakesideBrewing]

i suspect that 800ml is too small a starter for such a big beer (depending on batch size, initial pitch and the freshness of the yeast). maybe the yeast would have pushed farther with a bigger pitch.

I pitched 800ml of slurry, not a starter. According to Mr. Malty I over pitched. I wonder if that is just as bad as under pitching?

 

[mtnagel]

I've heard over pitching is better than under pitching.

 

[FRS]

I've heard over pitching is better than under pitching.

True, if you want a clean profile and the highest attenuation. Under pitching increases yeast stress, leading to more yeast derived flavors. In the case of Belgian styles and beers where we want Conan's "peachyness" that may be a good thing. However, under pitching by too much may also lead to poor attenuation or a stuck fermentation.

 

[Oldsock]

True, if you want a clean profile and the highest attenuation. Under pitching increases yeast stress, leading to more yeast derived flavors. In the case of Belgian styles and beers where we want Conan's "peachyness" that may be a good thing. However, under pitching by too much may also lead to poor attenuation or a stuck fermentation.

I got plenty of peach from pitching a 1.25 L stir-plate starter into a 1.058 pale ale.

Ester production is actually negatively correlated with yeast growth: "[E]ster production is related to yeast growth but not in the way you might think. The key element to yeast growth and ester production is acyl Co-A. It is necessary for both yeast growth and ester production. When it is busy with yeast growth, during the early part of the fermentation, it is not available for ester production. Ester production is directly related to biomass production. Everything that increases biomass production (intensive aeration, sufficient amount of unsaturated fatty acids, stirring) decreases ester production... Low pitching rate can result in less esters. " - http://www.danstaryeast.com/articles/yeast-growth

 

[FRS]

I got plenty of peach from pitching a 1.25 L stir-plate starter into a 1.058 pale ale.

Ester production is actually negatively correlated with yeast growth: "[E]ster production is related to yeast growth but not in the way you might think. The key element to yeast growth and ester production is acyl Co-A. It is necessary for both yeast growth and ester production. When it is busy with yeast growth, during the early part of the fermentation, it is not available for ester production. Ester production is directly related to biomass production. Everything that increases biomass production (intensive aeration, sufficient amount of unsaturated fatty acids, stirring) decreases ester production... Low pitching rate can result in less esters. " - http://www.danstaryeast.com/articles/yeast-growth

Thanks for sharing

 

[FRS]

I got plenty of peach from pitching a 1.25 L stir-plate starter into a 1.058 pale ale.

Ester production is actually negatively correlated with yeast growth: "[E]ster production is related to yeast growth but not in the way you might think. The key element to yeast growth and ester production is acyl Co-A. It is necessary for both yeast growth and ester production. When it is busy with yeast growth, during the early part of the fermentation, it is not available for ester production. Ester production is directly related to biomass production. Everything that increases biomass production (intensive aeration, sufficient amount of unsaturated fatty acids, stirring) decreases ester production... Low pitching rate can result in less esters. " - http://www.danstaryeast.com/articles/yeast-growth

Thanks for sharing this article. That's what I get for parroting 'conventional wisdom' without looking into it. What temp are you fermenting at to get peach notes? I fermented a wheat beer at 64 and didn't get much peach out of it at all.

 

[Oldsock]

Thanks for sharing this article. That's what I get for parroting 'conventional wisdom' without looking into it. What temp are you fermenting at to get peach notes? I fermented a wheat beer at 64 and didn't get much peach out of it at all.

Sadly that is the story for lots of the homebrewing knowledge passed around. There are other yeast byproducts (e.g., fusel alcohols) that are increased by lower-pitching rates, esters just aren't one of them. There is also a chance that some yeast strains behave differently.

I pitched at 70F and fermented at 64F ambient. Part of the story is almost certainly the synergy of the yeast with the hops (Simcoe, Mosaic, and Citra in my case). Recipe/Notes. I haven't used Conan in a lightly hopped beer to judge its character alone.

 

[WharfRat]

I'll add my experience with the ECY029 - this is my second try with the strain - well oxygenated .060 wort with yeast nutrient, fermented at 66-67, and is at .020 after 12 days, same gravity as before (on the heady clone with higher original gravity). I just roused the yeast (again) and cranked the ambient temp up to 74 to see if I can get a few more points down... but will be my last time trying this. I really wanted it to work. Love everything else I've tried from him, and really wanted this to work, but meh.

 

[Oldsock]

Another data point. My repitch of ECY029 went from 1.075 to 1.012.

 

[loctones]

That's good news. Maybe I just got a bad batch. Mine was prepared on Sept. 8, 2013. Based on the info on ECY's website, I assumed the vial had 300 billion cells at packaging and prepped an slightly oversized starter based on my brew date. I've read some accounts of the Sept. 8 release being stressed and propagated at too high of a temperature. Perhaps that, combined with the stress of shipping, caused the yeast to have a lower viability than I expected.

I'm looking forward to trying this yeast again, but I don't think I'm going to risk repitching from my current batch.

 

[gwren]

Interesting that my ECY-29 was from the 8 September batch as well. SOG was 1.066 and has only made it to 1.020 in a little over three weeks. I stepped a 3.5 liter starter three times and experienced a great krausen in each step. This is a 10 gal IPA that was mashed on the low side (147) and had .5 lb sugar as well to make it more fermentable. Fermentation was kept at 68F and it still has a cloudy, yeasty profile that shows it has a way to go before it is done. This would be three days into WLP090 or five into WLP001. The next step is to apply heat as I need my conical back.

 

[AnOldUR]

I'm looking forward to trying this yeast again . . .

How's the saying go? Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. There are too many good strains out there to be burnt again by this ECY product. Was there ever an admission of a problem or offer of restitution?

 

[loctones]

There are too many good strains out there to be burnt again by this ECY product. Was there ever an admission of a problem or offer of restitution?

Yeah, I don't think I'll be using the ECY variant again. There are a bunch of other smaller providers culturing the same strain.

I haven't emailed ECY, but I should. I upped the temp to 75 and still got no further activity. The yeast was completely finished at about 65% AA.