Conan Yeast Experiences

[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.

 

[zippybasher]

YG001 From Yeast Geek - Purchased about 10/25

I think the only way I'd use this yeast again is if I am wanting a High FG. This yeast is just so unpredictable its not worth the headache.
Batch #1 - Porter 1.054 - 1.014 Mashed 154º Ferment 63º - WIERD THIS FINISHED THE LOWEST WITH THE HIGHEST MASH TEMP AND CRYSTAL MALTS
Batch #2 - Citra IPA 1.070 - 1.020 Mashed 151º Ferment 65º Raised to 70º down to 1.015 - TOO MALTY
Batch #3 - Black Burst Ale 1.050 - 1.020 Mashed 152º Ferment 65º Raised to 70º down to 1.014 - TOO MALTY



I AM NOT IMPRESSED - THIS YEAST IS TOO UNPREDICTABLE - WILL STICK WITH PACMAN!:rockin:

 

[rshortt]

YG001 From Yeast Geek - Purchased about 10/25

I think the only way I'd use this yeast again is if I am wanting a High FG. This yeast is just so unpredictable its not worth the headache.
Batch #1 - Porter 1.054 - 1.014 Mashed 154º Ferment 63º - WIERD THIS FINISHED THE LOWEST WITH THE HIGHEST MASH TEMP AND CRYSTAL MALTS
Batch #2 - Citra IPA 1.070 - 1.020 Mashed 151º Ferment 65º Raised to 70º down to 1.015 - TOO MALTY
Batch #3 - Black Burst Ale 1.050 - 1.020 Mashed 152º Ferment 65º Raised to 70º down to 1.014 - TOO MALTY



I AM NOT IMPRESSED - THIS YEAST IS TOO UNPREDICTABLE - WILL STICK WITH PACMAN!:rockin:

What are you doing for aeration?

I'm about to have a go at this yeast.

 

[g-star]

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.

I contacted them after having similar stalling problems around 1.022 (OG 1.070), and it was kind of brushed off as a wort production problem, i.e., I didn't aerate enough (I used 90sec of pure O2), or I had too many unfermentables (95% base malt + sugar), or I mashed too high (148F). Their suggestion was that I rouse the yeast and raise the temperature. Duh, I never thought of that...

After another week of zero movement, I had to resort to cal ale yeast to get it down into the teens. Suffice to say I won't be using this strain again.

 

[gwren]

Very similar to my experience except my OG was 1.066. I had high hopes for this yeast too.

 

[dangerbrew]

Wow... I hope the sample I'm getting in the mail next week does well enough. I'm trading a guy some beer stickers for a vial to grow up a starter. His strain is from a friend's HT clone.

...If nothing else, I'm gonna make sure I aereate the bejeezus out of the thing going into the fermenter and keep a close eye on it for the first few days.

 

[tagz]

You guys might want to reserve judgement until yeast bay gets their strain going. They're going to have white labs do the production for them, so it will definitely be high quality sample.

 

[BeerGrylls]

I heard over on Reddit that the yeastbay guy just got back from his visit to white labs. It's all in the works.

 

[beauvafr]

I did the HT clone in a BIAB session. Mashed pretty high (not totally intended) and fermented at 64-66F. There was a lot of activity just a few hours later and it kept going for 36 hours. 5 days later it's down 1.019 from 1.071 (74%). I think it's finished. But I will ramp it to 70F and keep it there for a week.

 

[sweetcell]

You guys might want to reserve judgement until yeast bay gets their strain going. They're going to have white labs do the production for them, so it will definitely be high quality sample.

white won't be able to solve the problem, if the problem is the yeast itself.

it's less about the facility processing the yeast, and much more about the original source. taking that low-attenuating version of Conan over to WL isn't going to all of a sudden turn it into a maltose-munching monster.

 

[BeerGrylls]

The guy propagating it at white is saying that it will only yield high 70%s if you keep it around 66 or so, then raise to around 72. He went on to say that 64 degrees is enough to drop attenuation to the low 70s.

 

[tagz]

white won't be able to solve the problem, if the problem is the yeast itself.

it's less about the facility processing the yeast, and much more about the original source. taking that low-attenuating version of Conan over to WL isn't going to all of a sudden turn it into a maltose-munching monster.

You may be right but White might be more discriminating about the original sample. He can also use processes that ensure low stress and high viability. These other home style labs like yeast geek aren't likely to have the same capability.

As for me, I've had nothing but great experiences with Conan. I've only brewed three beers with my sample but all came in where I expected.

 

[powermd]

My Conan Bell's 2 hearted clone just finished keg conditioning and then chilling today. (OG/FG 1.54/1.010) I dropped a tea ball with 1 oz of Galaxy for a final dry hop in the keg. The first taste was interesting. Prior to the keg condition, the flavor was close to Bell's- clean and hoppy with Centennial. Now I realize the bottom of the keg is going to taste yeasty, but what I didn't expect was the clove like Belgian overtones that hint at Conan's origins. Very Belgian tasting now, we'll have to see if that holds true for the beer drawn from the middle of the keg. I'm very happy with the character added by keg conditioning though. The flavor seems much deeper than when I force carb.

 

[Ready2brew]

I had the same experience. I had to us some WLP01 to get mine down to 1.014 target from low teens. I would do again as the flavor profile is great and really sets the brew apart from our standard when using WLP01 or US 05.

 

[boswell]

I've used the ECY29 vial several times. Perhaps I was lucky as I got expected AA with beers finishing 1.012ish, however, IMO I will be abandoning the yeast because all of the beers taste too similar. The yeast has such a signature flavor that(again, in this very novice brewer's opinion) it was hard to discern the impact of different ingredients on the final product. However, I may just be a dummy.

 

[WharfRat]

However, I may just be a dummy.

I'm thinking of stealing this and adding it as an auto signature on all MY posts

 

[boswell]

Truer things have not been typed.

 

[jglazer]

Anyone have much experience mixing Conan with other strains for primary fermentation like US05, 1056, or any of the other standard/non standard strains?

 

[tagz]

Boy don't forget your whirlfloc when you brew with Conan. I have a really great tasting pale ale on tap that looks like mud. Had no clearing issues with the previous two batches.

 

[FRS]

Boy don't forget your whirlfloc when you brew with Conan. I have a really great tasting pale ale on tap that looks like mud. Had no clearing issues with the previous two batches.

One more data point :just pulled a sample of an ipa made with Conan a week ago. I used a single whirlfloc tab in 7.5 gallons and the beer has already dropped clear.

 

[BeerGrylls]

Piched a 24h starter of yeastgeek YG001 into a pale ale, and I'm 7 days into the ferment. Something is very wrong. I'm starting to get what I can only think is Brett funk. I have never used Brett in my brewhouse before, and my sanitation is spot-on so I don't think I introduced this myself. I can only think that this came in with the yeast. I haven't decided yet if I'm going to keep the beer yet, but I don't think a simcoe/amarillo pale is really the type to expect Brett/conan to shine.