Danstar London ESB Dry Ale Yeast - Anyone use it yet?

HomeBrewTalk.com - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Community.

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
So for the purpose of software since Brewers Friend does not show this yeast on the drop down, which yeast should I choose?
Use the White Labs London Ale (WLP002) or Wyeast 1968.

I would go for the standard 66% apparent attenuation as that seems what people are getting.
This Friday I'll brew up an oatmeal stout with a mash of 150 or so and see what I get.
 

dstockwell

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
994
Reaction score
139
Cool, thanks. Going to brew an ESB with this ESB this w/e.. Think I'll mash at 148.
 

ukulele01

Active Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
40
Reaction score
8
Location
Fredericton
So for the purpose of software since Brewers Friend does not show this yeast on the drop down, which yeast should I choose?
Choose Windsor. It is the same in that it does not ferment maltotriose either. They behave similarly too, with very fast ferments.

I am not an all grain brewer. Can someone tell me, if this yeast does not ferment maltotriose, how will mashing low help? Will it convert the maltotriose to maltose? Cheers!
 

apolo

New Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
4
Reaction score
5
Location
Santiago
I have a british brown currently fermenting with this strain. It's a quick starter, airlock bubbling 4 hours after pitching, but a slow worker.. day 6 and still bubbles in primary at 20ºC (68ºF).
 

Brew-Dog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
76
Reaction score
8
I've gotta say that I'm pretty disappointed with this yeast. I love WY1968 and WL002, so I was hoping for something similar.

A week ago I brewed a fairly simple pale ale (1.050). Mashed at 151f. The yeast took off pretty quickly, but then crapped out by day four. It has been sitting at 1.02 for the past few days. I fermented at 66f for the first couple of days then raised to 68, then 70. The esters are pretty subdued for an English strain as well. I'm going to pitch a lager yeast to chew through some of the remaining sugars and maltotriose to hopefully drop the FG another 6-10 points.

I think this yeast might do well in low OG styles (milds), but I don't think I'd use it again.
 

Boise1024

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2016
Messages
24
Reaction score
15
Just wanted to give an update about the porter I brewed nearly a month ago with Danstar London ESB yeast. As I posted earlier it stuck to 1.024 so I pitched a whole lot of US-05 slurry (about 2 cups...!) to finish the fermentation. OG was a 1.016 a week later so I kegged and force carbed. Resulting beer is quite nice, a bit fruity but not as much as WY1968. There is that minerally caracter that I sometimes get with english yeasts like S-04. All in all not too bad, but I won't be using this London ESB for such high OG beers (mine was 1.068), attenuation is not high enough. I might try it on a smaller 1.035-1.045 beer since I got another pack in the fridge.
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
I've gotta say that I'm pretty disappointed with this yeast. I love WY1968 and WL002, so I was hoping for something similar.

A week ago I brewed a fairly simple pale ale (1.050). Mashed at 151f. The yeast took off pretty quickly, but then crapped out by day four. It has been sitting at 1.02 for the past few days. I fermented at 66f for the first couple of days then raised to 68, then 70. The esters are pretty subdued for an English strain as well. I'm going to pitch a lager yeast to chew through some of the remaining sugars and maltotriose to hopefully drop the FG another 6-10 points.

I think this yeast might do well in low OG styles (milds), but I don't think I'd use it again.
That's a 59% apparent attenuation.

Just wanted to give an update about the porter I brewed nearly a month ago with Danstar London ESB yeast. As I posted earlier it stuck to 1.024 so I pitched a whole lot of US-05 slurry (about 2 cups...!) to finish the fermentation. OG was a 1.016 a week later so I kegged and force carbed. Resulting beer is quite nice, a bit fruity but not as much as WY1968. There is that minerally caracter that I sometimes get with english yeasts like S-04. All in all not too bad, but I won't be using this London ESB for such high OG beers (mine was 1.068), attenuation is not high enough. I might try it on a smaller 1.035-1.045 beer since I got another pack in the fridge.
I'm brewing an oatmeal stout tomorrow that'll have a OG of 1.054 and I expect to end at 1.017 with an estimated 66% attenuation.
Stay tuned :rockin:
 

Samaral

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
97
Reaction score
6
I just kegged my porter. It finnished at 1.021. The sg was 1.062.The sample tasted great.
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
Just brewed an Oatmeal stout: 1.054, oxygenated for 1 min with a diffusing stone, yeast nutrient, mashed at 148 and ended up 147 after an hour mash. Rehydrated one pack, and sprinkled another one without hydrating for the hell of it.
Pitched at 66, will rise to 68 and hold at 68 for the duration of the fermentation.
Expecting 1.017fg @ 66% attenuation.

20161028_175036.jpg


20161028_175044.jpg


20161028_210837.jpg
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
4 hours after pitch and it's already bubbling... Fast starter indeed!

**Next morning the yeast is going nuts and fermenting very vigorously at 67 degrees***
 

mabrungard

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,971
Reaction score
1,906
Location
Carmel
On it's face value, my reaction to a FG above 1.020 was negative. But the resulting beer is really not bad at all. In my case, the bit of roast and sulfate help dry the finish fairly effectively and the beer is not cloying. Enjoyable.

I can imagine that a pale beer that finished that high that didn't have sufficient sulfate in the brewing liquor, could be cloying. Do remember, this is listed as ESB yeast and ESB's are very commonly Burtonized to produce the nice dry finish. If you aren't adding a decent dose of sulfate to your brewing liquor, you may be less than pleased with the result.
 

hanuswalrus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
882
Reaction score
98
Location
Chicago
I brewed a Brown ale 3 weeks ago and chose to give this yeast a shot. I left it in the primary fermenter for 3 weeks exactly and went to bottle it today, assuming it was ready to bottle. Pulled a small sample to check gravity before racking to the bottling bucket and found an extremely cloudy beer. Gravity is at 1.012 (from 1.058) so I'm fairly certain it's at terminal gravity, but the yeast is just not flocculating. Tasted and smelled exactly how I wanted it to, but the clarity is nowhere near what I would expect from an English ale yeast. Fermented around 64-65 for the first 3-4 days and then pulled it from my chamber to a room that sits around 70-72 for the remainder of the 3 weeks. Thought it would definitely be finished and flocced out by now.

I chose not to bottle yet and just racked it to secondary because I don't know when I'll get another chance to bottle this one. A little disappointed with the clarity at this point, but the flavor and aroma are on point.
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
Checked gravity today. OG was 1.054 and 1.017 FG - exactly as I expected with the 66% apparent attenuation. Fermented very fast in only 3 days at 66-68!!!
The sample is very cloudy and yeasty, but it's very smooth.
Malt is not pronounced as I expected it... Maybe fermenting higher may give out less mild esters.
I'll let it condition at least another week before I keg it.

Overall not bad, but I wouldn't use it for anything higher than a mild or oatmeal stout due to the low attenuation.
 

duelerx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
165
Reaction score
34
On it's face value, my reaction to a FG above 1.020 was negative. But the resulting beer is really not bad at all. In my case, the bit of roast and sulfate help dry the finish fairly effectively and the beer is not cloying. Enjoyable.

I can imagine that a pale beer that finished that high that didn't have sufficient sulfate in the brewing liquor, could be cloying. Do remember, this is listed as ESB yeast and ESB's are very commonly Burtonized to produce the nice dry finish. If you aren't adding a decent dose of sulfate to your brewing liquor, you may be less than pleased with the result.
Really interesting, is it typical to brew Fuller's yeast strain with sufficient sulfate to get a pleasant dry finish?
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
Okay, while I rarely secondary, I decided to bottle the first batch brewed on this. Solid 64 degrees the entire fermentation. I posted the recipe up earlier in the thread. Basically a two hearted clone with Centennial hops but also with Lucky man hops (HSB-438) so calling it Lucky Hearted. Good color. Then brewed a red hoppy Amarillo wheat, right on the cake, did not even move out of the bucket. It's the best yeast cake I have seen. It's been a little over an hour, it's already kicked off. 68 degrees but should stay there or drop to the ambient temp which is 64.2 currently. Useless without pictures, so....

View attachment 1478047128075.jpg

View attachment 1478047140805.jpg

View attachment 1478047154165.jpg
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
Okay, while I rarely secondary, I decided to bottle the first batch brewed on this. Solid 64 degrees the entire fermentation. I posted the recipe up earlier in the thread. Basically a two hearted clone with Centennial hops but also with Lucky man hops (HSB-438) so calling it Lucky Hearted. Good color. Then brewed a red hoppy Amarillo wheat, right on the cake, did not even move out of the bucket. It's the best yeast cake I have seen. It's been a little over an hour, it's already kicked off. 68 degrees but should stay there or drop to the ambient temp which is 64.2 currently. Useless without pictures, so....
Nice! We'll see if there's an attenuation difference when re-pitching it.
Keep us posted.
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
Nice! We'll see if there's an attenuation difference when re-pitching it.
Keep us posted.
1.056 beginning gravity

will update the FG

and this red hoppy wheat is my now house beer. I have never made the same beer twice. This time I changed 1 lb Caravienne to .20 lbs crystal 60 and next time will use red X instead of 2 - row.
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
Brewed another oatmeal stout on Friday night with a 1.056 OG, and like my previous stout of 1.054, it finishes them in 2 days! This yeast is a beast, starts ridicously fast, and builds a huge krausen!

Both times the yeast was rehydrated, acclimated with a gallon of cooled wort before pitching, and fermented at 66-68.

The beers are finishing to FG fast enough where I can keep brewing weekly if I wanted - that's nice.

Now, what they'll taste like once conditioned and carbed remains to be seen - or rather tasted!:ban:
 

nicklawmusic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
311
Reaction score
7
Location
Sheffield
We've used this commercially in some of our batches at the brewery I run.

The positives, we've found, for this strain are it gives a lot of character that you don't get with many dried yeast strains, which opens up a realm of traditional beer styles and flavours that S-04, for example, doesn't.

The negatives are that the strain isn't very floculant, so cleaning it out of the fermentor or filtering it out of beer is a nightmare. And, more importantly, the apparent attentiation is not 65-75% but is much lower.

As a result, we've had beers that haven't fermented as low on their FG as we'd expected, one of which was our flagship Porter that now has to be bottled and labelled as something else.

Anyone else experienced these issues on a home or commercial brewer level?
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
Edit: Make it read easier, and proper use of the english language.

Nicklawmusic. Attenuation seemed normal, fermentation appeared to go much faster than us-o5 and the first batch brewed on it has a pleasant taste, a little different than what I get with us-05. Almost more of an Earthy flavor. I would LOVE to see a bells two hearted brewed with this. (was going to bottle, but ended up kegging)
First batch ended at 1.013 for a nice 5 + % and it’s very smooth, but a little young. I used NO clarifiers, and it’s got a very nice (to me) golden color and is hazy.

Second batch was put on the cake, with a starting 1.056 OG
This batch was done with it’s primary fermentation within 1 ½ days. It took off like a rocket, then was done. I brewed this on 11/1, put it in the secondary on 11/6 and it’s actually very clear at this time. I’ll post up some pics if there is interest.
 

ten80

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
590
Reaction score
237
Location
Anchorage
...

The positives, we've found, for this strain are it gives a lot of character that you don't get with many dried yeast strains, which opens up a realm of traditional beer styles and flavours that S-04, for example, doesn't.

The negatives are that the strain isn't very floculant, so cleaning it out of the fermentor or filtering it out of beer is a nightmare. And, more importantly, the apparent attentiation is not 65-75% but is much lower.

As a result, we've had beers that haven't fermented as low on their FG as we'd expected, ...
Great, sounds like I need to try this strain for session beers and meads, and for ciders where I'd like to keep some residual sugars. I hope to report back in the next couple of months.
 

jahlinux

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
157
Reaction score
44
Brewed a Porter and a Dark Mild that I usually use WLP-002 in, decided to try S-04 and both beers did not come out good at all. The S-04 made the beers dry, sharp, not smooth, and killed the malt flavor. I was hoping the London ESB would be a better alternative to WLP-002. I'll have to try it in the Porter and report back.
 

bitternick

New Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Location
Basingstoke
We've used this commercially in some of our batches at the brewery I run.

The positives, we've found, for this strain are it gives a lot of character that you don't get with many dried yeast strains, which opens up a realm of traditional beer styles and flavours that S-04, for example, doesn't.

The negatives are that the strain isn't very floculant, so cleaning it out of the fermentor or filtering it out of beer is a nightmare. And, more importantly, the apparent attentiation is not 65-75% but is much lower.

As a result, we've had beers that haven't fermented as low on their FG as we'd expected, one of which was our flagship Porter that now has to be bottled and labelled as something else.

Anyone else experienced these issues on a home or commercial brewer level?
I found this with my homebrew setup too. I have just kegged a stout but only got about 61% attenuation. It had reached FG by the time I took the first reading at 3 days so it's quick. It didn't change after that.
It's very cloudy but being a home brew dark beer it's not a big problem. I cold crashed for 4 days which helped a bit but decided not to add any gelatine.

One thing which is not mentioned earlier (that I can see) is the cell count in the packs being low so most brews need 2 packs or a starter, in theory. That makes it expensive/high hassle for a dried yeast.
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
fyi, 2nd batch went down to 1.012 so not do shabby. This beer is pretty clear for a wheat beer at this time. Bottled it as well, and will update if any good in a few weeks.. (any noticable difference in taste)
 

FVillatoro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
295
Reaction score
82
fyi, 2nd batch went down to 1.012 so not do shabby. This beer is pretty clear for a wheat beer at this time. Bottled it as well, and will update if any good in a few weeks.. (any noticable difference in taste)
This was the wheat beer that you pitched on the entire yeast cake, right?
If so, that's a 78%AA if you went from 1.056 - 1.012! That's a significant increase... It could either be because you overpitched, or because the later generations may become more attenuative.
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
yep, that was the entire cake. Checked twice on the FG..

and yeah, it was an overpitch since it was the entire cake, that I happily disturbed and stirred up..

I have a blonde I want to try with it, but will split up the cake and preserve it for next time. so far I like this yeast...
 

tri_clamp_ninja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
110
Reaction score
73
Location
Port Orange, FL
I am a professional brewer who recently joined a start up brewery based out of Florida that is still in it's testing phase while our facility and equipment build out is being completed. Due to our warm climate (even at this time of year) we have had a ton of stability and viability issues with liquid yeast and have been experimenting with using fresh, quality dry yeast. So far we have been very pleased as a whole however this London ESB strain has proved time and time again to be poorly attenuating and the worst in terms of flocculation I have ever used (saying that with experience using most of wyeast, white labs, and danstar's portfolios on a commercial scale). It does leave a bit of residual body in relation to other strains however appropriate mash schedule and recipe composition can make up for that while still finishing at a proper FG and balanced flavor profile. I have tried this yeast on commercial equipment with a wide variety of test batches from IPA to Porter, Pale Ale to Stout, extract to all grain, and OGs ranging anywhere from 1.045-1.070 and every single time it hits 1.020 after "primary" (pre-d rest) and FG of 1.018.

I could play with recipes to make the low attenuation work but what really makes this yeast unusable for me in my production setting is it's horrendous flocculation. I've gone as far as 3+ days at 30-31f with yeast dumps along the way and it still looks like a damn hefe. Could I filter it? Yea, sure. But I shouldn't have to as well as I don't know if any of you have experience with working commercial grade plate and frame filters but I would be looking at a longer filter session then brew session every time this yeast is used.

I am going to start another thread where we brewed a simple SMaSH split into three different carboys under proper temp control and pitched a different yeast in each one (all danstar: london esb, nottingham, bry-97 american west coast). We are monitoring gravity, ph, aromatics, flavor, and visual activity and clarity along the way. As of now they are in their d rest phase. We are looking at 3 core brands and trying to dial in on one specific "house" strain that will be used for all 3.
 

ChelisHubby

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
1,328
Reaction score
275
Ninja please post you experiences with the three yeast. I am interested in your take between Bry 97 and Nottingham.
 

tri_clamp_ninja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
110
Reaction score
73
Location
Port Orange, FL
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=595170

Just put it up today. I'll keep posting as it goes. Next update will be Friday with final gravity, final ph, and final fermentation notes. At that point I'll initiate cold crash, take my usual weekend off of work, then next Monday it all gets kegged and carbed. I'll then have final conclusive taste and appearance date by Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.

If any of you are near central fl stop over for a beer on me!
 

tri_clamp_ninja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
110
Reaction score
73
Location
Port Orange, FL
Its pretty darn clear. I don't use Irish moss, whirfloc, etc.
Interesting, I've used this yeast under a variety of conditions for a variety of ales and it doesn't want to drop like that for me, even under 31f for 3+ days. I have no issue with protein drop or chill haze formation, it's for sure yeast. May I inquire as to what your recipe consisted of and what your typical brew/fermentation sop is so I can determine what part of your process is aiding in the flocculation like that?
 

kristiismean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
873
Reaction score
201
Interesting, I've used this yeast under a variety of conditions for a variety of ales and it doesn't want to drop like that for me, even under 31f for 3+ days. I have no issue with protein drop or chill haze formation, it's for sure yeast. May I inquire as to what your recipe consisted of and what your typical brew/fermentation sop is so I can determine what part of your process is aiding in the flocculation like that?
9 Lbs pale 2 row
2 lbs Vienna
Centennial .5 60min .5 30min .5 15min .5 10min .5 4min and HSB-438 .5 4min
Mash in 148, pitched at 68, fermented at 63-64 (63.8 1st 24 hours 63.9 2nd 24 hours and 64.2 for the rest. This is ambient temperature.
Brewed 10/20 secondary on 11/2 and kegged on 11/5 OG I did not write down, thinking 1.052 or 1.048 and ended up at 1.013
I was mainly looking to see what this yeast added, and to create a light starter for the next batch, which ended up just being my hoppy red wheat, but I planned on a different beer. (not really red, just uses red wheat so I should stop calling it that.)
 

Hanglow

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
808
Location
Glasgow
How much calcium have you all used in the mash/wort when using this yeast out of interest?

cheers to everyone reporting back on this yeast, I want to use it soon
 
Top