English Ales - What's your favorite recipe?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

Erik the Anglophile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
516
Reaction score
448
Location
Ís ok snœrs ok miðnótts boði landi frá komum
Well the rudgates was just as a baseline, I want the caramel sweetness but would also like a little nutty and chocolatey roast to it.
I was looking at the list with historic mild grainbills posted earlier, and many of them seemed to have quite the roasty kick to them, so I figured why not try that? I personally really enjoy Brown malt in moderate amounts as a way to add depth, but that's just my personal taste.
 

Northern_Brewer

British - apparently some US company stole my name
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
Messages
3,389
Reaction score
2,812
Location
UK
I've been tinkering on a recipe for a dark mild:
MO as base
8% Crystal, will likely do my usual mix of 50/50 Crisp C150/240(ebc)
8% Invert #3(probably demerara)
4% Brown malt (Crisp)
2% Chocolate malt
The recipe looks fine - the thing about mild is that it comes in all sorts of variations both regionally and at a brewery level. Using that much speciality malt is perhaps taking it away from the classic West Midlands version into something closer to the Northwest style (which tends to use more crystal than most), but it will work. By way of example, see the Lees Best Mild in the 1950s :

It can't be emphasised enough that Lees were not very typical - not many breweries post-WWII had two milds. The whole idea of Best Mild was a bit of a contradiction in terms and having a dark best and a pale "ordinary" mild was really quite unusual. And just generally, using so much speciality malt was not common (see Ron's other Dark Mild recipes), I guess that's what justified "Best" status... But some of those early 1950s recipes look quite tasty, even if they changed them a lot.

Would think that 1.8 -2.0 vol a little over carbed for english style bitter for example. Usually about 1.2 vols so at 11c that would be only 1.67 psi.
It seems the numbers I had was the ones I looked up and used for bottling. After googling a bit and reading a post by @Northern_Brewer I believe something along 1.5-1.7 would be apropriate in the keg to get a little faux cask feel. I will start at 1.6 and see how I like it.
And does anyone have any opinions on the mild recipe? Looking to get something in the vein of Rudgate's ruby mild, but lower abv and a little roasty kick to it.
It's worth reminding people that proper cask-conditioned ale does have "condition", the tired stuff in tourist pubs is not cask at its best. Taking a random Google, this Purity shows a proper amount of condition, even if the head is a bit too big even for a sparkler (already about 12% by my measurement, with more to come once it's settled a little more).
1635420180742.png


I don't force carbonate, so can't really compare what's right, but certainly when bottling adding sugar that the calculators say will take me to around 1.8-1.9 feels about right for bitter. I'd probably go a bit lower for mild though - as a weaker, more delicate beer it's easy to wreck the balance with too much CO2. I have had really fresh mild on cask that was so lively that it didn't even need a sparkler to give good head, but it was only like that for 2-3 hours after going on, by the end of the session it had a loose sparkler on. (part of the art of cask cellarmanship is adapting the serve to the lifecycle of a beer)
 

cire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
454
Reaction score
290
Location
UK
Some of the work for this paper was done in a pub where I drink. Sadly the procedure has changed since 2016 against the wishes of the management, but that's so often business. Then the casks were on stillages and vented as required, tapped and sampled. If the beer was ready, or when it was ready, the spile would be completely removed, not even a soft spile would be used. If any beer remained after 7 days (very rarely) it would be taken off and the cask drained.

Carbonation is measured both by volume and weight. The paper gives g/L and if divided by 1.96 will give vol.

Beer served with nitrogen is very different to naturally carbonated.
 

kmarkstevens

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Feb 19, 2017
Messages
774
Reaction score
905
Personally I don't care much for brown malt and too much roast... 2% would be a bit too much for my liking, but that's just me. Maybe cold steeping the chocolate malt?
I think Brown tastes like ass. And I have had Samuel Smith's Nut Brown Ale, which has the same ass taste. I'm postulating that Sam Smith uses brown but I could easily be wrong.

What I have read and tried is whenever a receipe calls for brown, then can substitute double the amount of biscuit (amber).
 

Attachments

kmarkstevens

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Feb 19, 2017
Messages
774
Reaction score
905
Love the way this thread bounces from one topic to the next.

Now that we are on dark mild recipies maybe it has been linked in one of the previous 67 pages but in case anyone's interested and hasn't seen this one before.
It seems to be very popular.

I call this Orfy's mild. It is the recipe that has pulled me down the Mild rabbit hole.

BTW, anyone know what's become of Orfy? I fear he is holding court in the great brewery in the sky.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
I think Brown tastes like ass. And I have had Samuel Smith's Nut Brown Ale, which has the same ass taste. I'm postulating that Sam Smith uses brown but I could easily be wrong.

What I have read and tried is whenever a receipe calls for brown, then can substitute double the amount of biscuit (amber).
I taste chocolate malt in there but no brown malt, but I could be obviously completely wrong.

I also don't like brown malt, not the biggest fan of chocolate malt either, but somehow I really like the nutbrown ale.
 

duncan_disorderly

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
157
Reaction score
95
Location
Manchester England
I taste chocolate malt in there but no brown malt, but I could be obviously completely wrong.

I also don't like brown malt, not the biggest fan of chocolate malt either, but somehow I really like the nutbrown ale.
I don't think SS Nut Brown ale uses brown malt. Fuller's London Porter does, and I think that is a really nice beer, personally. I use brown malt in stouts and porters, I like it.
 

Erik the Anglophile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
516
Reaction score
448
Location
Ís ok snœrs ok miðnótts boði landi frá komum
I really like brown malt aswell, a porter without a fair deal of brown don't taste like porter IMO. Altough it needs some ageing to mellow out.
However I have found that brown malt in moderate amounts, a few percent of the grist, will not really give that brown malt flavour but rather a dry-ish toasty nuttyness. I personally really enjoy it in my northern style paler Brown Ale.
 

Silver_Is_Money

Larry Sayre, Developer of 'Mash Made Easy'
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
5,955
Reaction score
1,866
Location
N/E Ohio
I've made a decent Biscuit type malt via roasting Vienna base malt in an oven at 120 C. (250 F.) for one hour. If I extended this process to 2 hours might I wind up with something akin to a Brown malt?
 

duncan_disorderly

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
157
Reaction score
95
Location
Manchester England
I've made a decent Biscuit type malt via roasting Vienna base malt in an oven at 120 C. (250 F.) for one hour. If I extended this process to 2 hours might I wind up with something akin to a Brown malt?
Never done it but John Palmer says in his section about toasting grains:


350 °FWet2 hoursStrong Toast/Roast flavor similar to Brown Malt.

Since the browning reactions are influenced by the wetness of the grain, water can be used in conjunction with the toasting process to produce different flavors in the malt. Soaking the uncrushed malt in water for an hour will provide the water necessary to optimize the Maillard browning reactions. Toasting wet malt will produce more of a caramel flavor due to partial starch conversion taking place from the heat. Toasting dry grain will produce more of a toast or Grape-Nuts cereal flavor which is perfect for nut-brown ales.
 

patto1ro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
298
Reaction score
82
So just more theory then. And very controversial, too, in terms of mutation models. I’m not sure I’d want to offer that as any form of supporting evidence for mysterious claims made by breweries and their marketing department’s spiel, which likely has more to do with selling beer than genuinely fortuitous outcomes of unconsciously repitching slurry for decades.

Having slept on it, I can divide my skepticism here. There’s the logic among home brewers (once including myself) that pitching multiple yeast strains is going to add some desirable, unique complexity in the end product. Something demonstrably worth the extra effort. Something 'special'. As I already typed I no longer accept this to be true, based on my experience involving many trials. Biased by my own taste mainly, to be fair. But this isn’t necessarily the same as serially repitching a brewery culture over at least several decades. If the brewery's yeast went bad it was replaced by calling in a favour. No big deal really, the main focus was producing beer and selling it. I think that's the hard reality fogged in mysterious, romantic stories.

For those that have apparently remained good for long periods, how do we know the beers produced haven’t changed due to the yeast population evolving ‘this’ way and ‘that’ over time, becoming a mixed population? I’m not talking about abrupt changes, ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Gradual change. This is a more realistic model, which doesn’t require anything to hide behind. We both know what would likely happen if a pure brewer’s yeast colony were cultured up and serially repitched by the bucket load over years. It would diversify and become a mixed population. Genetic diversity accumulates over time. Not necessarily different strains mind. But that is possible and they’d be closely related and perhaps more compatible than a designed mixture of strains. We hear a lot of talk about multi-strain yeast cultures, but, again, there’s rarely any evidence to support the claims. What I’d like to see is some credible evidence to back up the claims. That’s not too much to ask for, is it? As a proud Brit who enjoys a good English pint, I’m more than happy to defend British brewing heritage, but I refuse to talk shite about it. How difficult can it be to design a project, perhaps for a PhD student at Herriot-Watt or Nottingham, to characterise a rumoured multi-strain brewery culture, described as ‘among the finest in the land’, then ferment with individual strains and various combinations of strains so as to demonstrate the brewery’s marketing department aren’t talking shite? If it's as good as they claim, isn't it worth preserving? The fact such evidence hasn’t been presented so far says something. The methodology (technology) to do so quite easily has been around for decades. I’m afraid it looks to me like they’re talking shite. And I get excellent results using pure yeast strains from traditional English breweries to ferment my home brew. I know they’re pure because I plated them out and isolated them myself. 🤷‍♂️

Edit: Interim summary: the competing hypotheses here are: stable multi-strain brewery yeast vs evolving chancers flogging beer. It seems to make more sense when you ditch the romanticism.
Fergus Fitzgerald, head brewer at Adnams, explained to me that they're lumbered with a pitching strain with two different yeasts. As much as they would like to, neither one of them, individually, can be used to get the character they want. One strain provides most of the flavour, the other the attenuation. Either used by themselves doesn't work. As it's a total pain in the arse for them - especially keeping the right balance of the two as they don't propagate at the same rate - I'm inclined to believe them.

Who know what the hell is in Harvey's yeast. They've been repitching for 60 years and I'm sure they have a whole multitude of yeasts in their culture. Most of which, admittedly, probably do bugger all. Then there's the Debaraomyces they didn't realise was in there until they aged a beer for more than 6 months.
 

patto1ro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
298
Reaction score
82
Are there any data at all that show these multi-strain slurries have remained stable over extended time periods, in what are potentially very competitive microbial systems? Otherwise it's just heresy, interesting abstract theory and head brewers telling romantic stories. I can just see a head brewer grinning whilst telling mesmerised visitors how old and special the brewery’s multi-strain yeast are. I gave up trialing multi-strain pitchings some time ago, when it became apparent it wasn't worth the additional effort. I think it's more to do with the inevitable outcome of cultural practices (including sloppy ones) and resistance against foreign discoveries and practices to manage single strains, i.e., control and consistency. I've been able to maintain pure yeast strains for several years without noting any 'drift'. It's a bit worrying some professional brewers can't. But I'm always happy to be disproved, if data show otherwise.
According to Miles Jenner, Harvey's yeast sometimes goes a bit weird, then sorts itself out again. Having seen their yeast handling - open-topped tubs of yeast slurry - I'm amazed they haven't had all sorts of horrible problems. Who knows how genetically similar it is to the John Smiths yeast they first pitched in the 1950s.
 

patto1ro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
298
Reaction score
82
According to Miles Jenner, Harvey's yeast sometimes goes a bit weird, then sorts itself out again. Having seen their yeast handling - open-topped tubs of yeast slurry - I'm amazed they haven't had all sorts of horrible problems. Who knows how genetically similar it is to the John Smiths yeast they first pitched in the 1950s.
Here's a photo of Harvey's yeast storage:
P1050401.JPG
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
@patto1ro Yes, I'm well aware of all the romantic stories told by head brewers. My point was there's very little credible evidence to back them up. I find this very surprising. The ecology of fermentation of English cider apples has been well documented for years. All we have for England's brewing heritage are unconfirmed stories and general agreement Brettanomyces claussenii can be a factor. Without evidence I refuse to take them seriously. It's not rocket science. Brewers do enjoy their lore, though, don't they? It sells beer. It's more likely the case they are hoping to protect their 'secret' by sending folk down rabbit holes. Nor do I reject the idea that a brewery yeast slurry serially repitched over decades or longer is going to diversify. But that's not necessarily the same as different strains evolving. Just another untested hypotheses. In terms of Harvey's yeast, it's more than capable of defending itself after being top cropped then repitched a day or two later, whilst at it healthiest, despite how things might be perceived as it waits sitting in open buckets. Putting a lid on might lead to unfortunate consequences with a beast like that. The strain I isolated from Harvey's slurry is surprisingly difficult to ferment with when following 'typical' home brew methods, but it is possible, if pitched at a very high rate (probably more comparable to what Harvey's pitch) at 17℃ and roused occasionally. Among my collection of Yorkshire strains it's safe to say it's the most aggressive and converts sugars at an alarming rate attenuating at 80-82%. In fact, I reckon it would eat kveik for breakfast.
 
Last edited:

patto1ro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
298
Reaction score
82
@patto1ro Yes, I'm well aware of all the romantic stories told by head brewers. My point was there's very little credible evidence to back them up. I find this very surprising. The ecology of fermentation of English cider apples has been well documented for years. All we have for England's brewing heritage are unconfirmed stories and general agreement Brettanomyces claussenii can bit a factor. Without evidence I refuse to take them seriously. It's not rocket science. Brewers do enjoy their lore, though, don't they? It sells beer. It's more likely the case they are hoping to protect their 'secret' by sending folk down rabbit holes. Nor do I reject the idea that a brewers yeast slurry serially repitched over decades or longer is going to diversify. But that's not necessarily the same as different strains evolving. Just another untested hypotheses. In terms of Harvey's yeast, it's more than capable of defending itself after being top cropped then repitched a day or two later, whist at it healthiest, despite how things might be perceived as it waits sitting in open buckets. Putting a lid on might lead to unfortunate consequences with a beast like that. The strain I isolated from Harvey's slurry is surprisingly difficult to ferment with when following 'typical' home brew methods, but it is possible, if pitched at a very high rate (probably more comparable to what Harvey's pitch) at 17℃ and roused occasionally. Among my collection of Yorkshire strains it's safe to say it's the most aggressive and converts sugars at an alarming rate attenuating at 80-82%. In fact, I reckon it would eat kveik for breakfast.
Harvey's is a Yorkshire square yeast in origin so needs to be roused.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
Harvey's is a Yorkshire square yeast in origin so needs to be roused.
Yes, I know very well, as I ferment most of my English ales in a Yorkshire square.

IMG_0359.JPG

Can you comment on any of the other points raised? Specifically the dire lack of even the most basic evidence to support the mysterious stories that abound re the use of multi strain yeast in traditional English breweries? My personal observations suggest single strains work exceptionally well by themselves.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
I think I should explain where I am on this, just to be clear and avoid any misunderstandings. For years I believed the logic behind promoting desirable yeast-driven complexity in beer by using more than one yeast strain to ferment wort. But, when I went searching for it I didn't find anything that justified the extra effort of managing more than one strain. Then I stuck my biologist's head on and questioned quite a lot of the logic. I haven't been able to find any data on the subject for traditional English breweries. I'm not saying the logic is wrong, just that my own observations haven't supported it and I haven't been able to find any data to support it either. So much for beliefs? Unless my skepticism - healthy in my view - can be demonstrated to be unjustified I have to accept the logic as little more than romantic lore. I'm always happy to be proven wrong, because it's the truth that matters more regardless. One of the funniest ones I heard was that Ringwood Brewery (New Forest, UK) has been serially repitching its yeast for so long the brewery's yeast now consists of at least a dozen strains. Funny, because yeast I isolated from a single Ringwood colony plated from culture prepped with slurry from the brewery produced fine ales comparable in character to Ringwood Brewery's. I practically grew up on the stuff, being born about 30 minutes up the road from the brewery. I'd say it's remarkably similar to Wyeast's 'Ringwood Ale' 1187, too, which isn't surprising given one or two breweries in the US use it and it was once reckoned to be one of the most commonly used ale strains in the world. More lore? Who knows?
 

monkeymath

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2019
Messages
397
Reaction score
374
I haven't been able to find any data on the subject for traditional English breweries. I'm not saying the logic is wrong, just that my own observations haven't supported it and I haven't been able to find any data to support it either. So much for beliefs? Unless my skepticism - healthy in my view - can be demonstrated to be unjustified I have to accept the logic as little more than romantic lore. I'm always happy to be proven wrong, because it's the truth that matters more regardless.
I don't have anything substantial to say on the matter at hand - although I am curious to learn about it - but I don't think I follow or agree with your reasoning here.
While your scepticism is appropriate, there's a difference between "I couldn't make it work, and they don't disclose how they do it" and "they are not [or even: cannot] be doing it".
If their particular handling of their multistrain yeasties was indeed a thing and, moreover, the source of their signature flavour, then it's not too surprising they wouldn't share it all too openly.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
I don't have anything substantial to say on the matter at hand - although I am curious to learn about it - but I don't think I follow or agree with your reasoning here.
While your scepticism is appropriate, there's a difference between "I couldn't make it work, and they don't disclose how they do it" and "they are not [or even: cannot] be doing it".
If their particular handling of their multistrain yeasties was indeed a thing and, moreover, the source of their signature flavour, then it's not too surprising they wouldn't share it all too openly.
But I seem to get comparable results using pure yeast strains isolated from individual colonies. Where's the 'magic' exactly? The technology to easily characterise multi-strain brewery slurries has been around for decades. A very simple experimental design to assess beers fermented with A, B compared with AB makes good business sense, especially if you could demonstrate to your customers they were buying a lot more than romantic stories. On the other hand, if it was a load of bollocks, you'd want to avoid confirming it, right? The marketing department would be up in arms.

Edit: I guess if you want to deal with what seems to be your main problem here, exclude me from the equation then ask the same question ;)
 
Last edited:

patto1ro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
298
Reaction score
82
Yes, I know very well, as I ferment most of my English ales in a Yorkshire square.

View attachment 747559
Can you comment on any of the other points raised? Specifically the dire lack of even the most basic evidence to support the mysterious stories that abound re the use of multi strain yeast in traditional English breweries? My personal observations suggest single strains work exceptionally well by themselves.
Very impressive. That's commitment building your own Yorkshire square. Does fermenting in it affect the flavour of the beer?

I can only talk from my own direct experience. As mentioned before, Adnams need both of their strains to get the attenuation and flavour that they aim for. Neither on its own would work.

Other than circumstances like that, I'm sure single strains mostly work perfectly well.

Fullers had three strains until they moved to conicals. They picked the one which produced the most of the flavour. Brewers are very reluctant to do anything which might change the character of their beer. That would explain why they might stick with multiple strains when they weren't really needed.

A professional brewer (I can't remember which one, I'm afraid) told me that if you analysed the yeast of breweries who repitch, there would always be several wild strains present, but in tiny quantities. Too small to have any effect on the beer. The quantities of them were small because, obviously, the real strain would outcompete the wild ones being far better at fermenting the sugars found in wort.

I don't know what sort of evidence you're looking for about multi-strain yeasts. I've come across plenty of references in brewing texts, albeit mostly ones 50+ years old. I've discussed the topic a few times with brewers. They didn't pretend that there was any particular magic. But that it did have an impact on their beer. Each of the yeasts bringing something to the table, either in terms of flavour or fermentation characteristics.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
Very impressive. That's commitment building your own Yorkshire square. Does fermenting in it affect the flavour of the beer?

I can only talk from my own direct experience. As mentioned before, Adnams need both of their strains to get the attenuation and flavour that they aim for. Neither on its own would work.

Other than circumstances like that, I'm sure single strains mostly work perfectly well.

Fullers had three strains until they moved to conicals. They picked the one which produced the most of the flavour. Brewers are very reluctant to do anything which might change the character of their beer. That would explain why they might stick with multiple strains when they weren't really needed.

A professional brewer (I can't remember which one, I'm afraid) told me that if you analysed the yeast of breweries who repitch, there would always be several wild strains present, but in tiny quantities. Too small to have any effect on the beer. The quantities of them were small because, obviously, the real strain would outcompete the wild ones being far better at fermenting the sugars found in wort.

I don't know what sort of evidence you're looking for about multi-strain yeasts. I've come across plenty of references in brewing texts, albeit mostly ones 50+ years old. I've discussed the topic a few times with brewers. They didn't pretend that there was any particular magic. But that it did have an impact on their beer. Each of the yeasts bringing something to the table, either in terms of flavour or fermentation characteristics.
Yes, the beers are more rounded, smoother and more interesting generally. More comparable to commercially available traditional English ales than underpitched home brew that can have unbalanced (amplified) yeast profiles jumping out of the glass. The ‘phenolic’ character associated with some Yorkshire strains is reduced quite dramatically producing some nice subtle, balanced complexity. Only seems to work well with true top croppers that like to climb out of the wort. It’s possible a highly active yeast head releases sufficient CO2 to minimise oxidation. I’m not convinced these strains benefit from air/O2 during fermentation, as sometimes claimed by head brewers. More lore? That logic doesn’t make much sense biologically. The rousing/recirculation is done periodically during active fermentation only, according to historical descriptions in the brewing literature. It’s very effective at getting yeast back into the wort, from the yeast head and off the bottom of the FV. A much improved fermentation performance generally. To top it, the yeast trough automatically traps the most active (healthiest?) yeast cells for repitching. Directly pitchable yeast this good are rarely available to buy. It has to be harvested and repitched within a few days to fully appreciate it and indeed the Yorkshire square design itself generally.

IMG_0363.JPG


In terms of evidence, I’d like to see some data to confirm the claims, because without data they are just claims. Opinions. If the perceived logic is more than just romantic beliefs it should be easy to confirm with data and documented to better understand what’s going on. The null hypothesis is multi-strain yeast in traditional English breweries are merely the result of sloppy (by 20th century standards) yeast management practices. No one seems to have formally assessed multi-strain yeasts from traditional English breweries. There are no published data to support the claims. Therefore we can’t accept the logic. We’re stuck awkwardly clinging on to a belief. That doesn’t work for me. People have a tendency to make up all kinds of ****. Especially when traditional brewing is the topic. Present company excepted, of course.
 

cire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
454
Reaction score
290
Location
UK
Of 39 British pitching yeasts, 12 contained a single strain, 16 had 2 major strains, while the rest had 3 or more components.
From a paper to the IOB in 1959.

I think a later paper by the same author said that the number/proportion of multi strained yeasts had decreased.

Didn't Hansen try getting Burton brewers to adopt single strain yeast he had isolated, but met with overwhelming rejection?
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
Yes, the beers are more rounded, smoother and more interesting generally. More comparable to commercially available traditional English ales than underpitched home brew that can have unbalanced (amplified) yeast profiles jumping out of the glass. The ‘phenolic’ character associated with some Yorkshire strains is reduced quite dramatically producing some nice subtle, balanced complexity. Only seems to work well with true top croppers that like to climb out of the wort. It’s possible a highly active yeast head releases sufficient CO2 to minimise oxidation. I’m not convinced these strains benefit from air/O2 during fermentation, as sometimes claimed by head brewers. More lore? That logic doesn’t make much sense biologically. The rousing/recirculation is done periodically during active fermentation only, according to historical descriptions in the brewing literature. It’s very effective at getting yeast back into the wort, from the yeast head and off the bottom of the FV. A much improved fermentation performance generally. To top it, the yeast trough automatically traps the most active (healthiest?) yeast cells for repitching. Directly pitchable yeast this good are rarely available to buy. It has to be harvested and repitched within a few days to fully appreciate it and indeed the Yorkshire square design itself generally.

View attachment 747636

In terms of evidence, I’d like to see some data to confirm the claims, because without data they are just claims. Opinions. If the perceived logic is more than just romantic beliefs it should be easy to confirm with data and documented to better understand what’s going on. The null hypothesis is multi-strain yeast in traditional English breweries are merely the result of sloppy (by 20th century standards) yeast management practices. No one seems to have formally assessed multi-strain yeasts from traditional English breweries. There are no published data to support the claims. Therefore we can’t accept the logic. We’re stuck awkwardly clinging on to a belief. That doesn’t work for me. People have a tendency to make up all kinds of ****. Especially when traditional brewing is the topic. Present company excepted, of course.
Did you ever try verdant IPA within your nicely build fermentation something you got there? It produces the biggest Kräusen I've ever seen and the esters can get a bit extreme. Would be interesting to hear how it performs in such a unique environment.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
Did you ever try verdant IPA within your nicely build fermentation something you got there? It produces the biggest Kräusen I've ever seen and the esters can get a bit extreme. Would be interesting to hear how it performs in such a unique environment.
Afraid not. Only used English strains to date. I have some Belgian strains that might be interesting, but haven't done any Belgian ales for ages.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
Afraid not. Only used English strains to date. I have some Belgian strains that might be interesting, but haven't done any Belgian ales for ages.
Isn't verdant ipa an English strain? It tastes at least English to me :D
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
Of 39 British pitching yeasts, 12 contained a single strain, 16 had 2 major strains, while the rest had 3 or more components.
From a paper to the IOB in 1959.

I think a later paper by the same author said that the number/proportion of multi strained yeasts had decreased.

Didn't Hansen try getting Burton brewers to adopt single strain yeast he had isolated, but met with overwhelming rejection?
Yes, as a student of Hansen's I think I've read there was overwhelming rejection of 'a newly emerging continental practice daring to promote standardisation in British breweries'. Same reason we still drink pints, I reckon. :D Interesting publication, though. I've got a copy in my references. Although, it would be a bit crap to be too critical about it in 2021, I'm not going to argue against the general observations that multi-strain yeast were being pitched in British breweries. But it still remains a potentially inevitable outcome of sloppy practices rather than conscious design. Funny that some breweries were apparently pitching single strains without knowing it. Maybe they weren't so sloppy? Or maybe they were even sloppier and promoted competition in their original multi-strain culture? As an observational survey it throws up more questions than answers, to a now-skeptic like me. I'd expect most of what's described across breweries for a variety of possible reasons. They might well have under- or over-estimated the number of strains. I observe yeast from an individual colony, clones, expressing 2-3 different behaviours while fermenting wort. Behaviours that contrast so much it wouldn't be unreasonable to imagine there were at least 2 strains in there, some climbing out of the wort and others sat quite actively on the bottom fermenting away (bubbling profusely at least) under the wort, which is quite bright with some strains, and sometimes others (a 3rd group) whizzing around randomly in it.

I have no doubts multi-strain yeast were being pitched. I'd expect it, given the sloppy practices. What's missing from the literature, though, are data that confirm there are actually worthwhile benefits, for the end product, the beer, of pitching multi-strain yeast. We can theorise until the cows come home about the possible benefits of pitching multiple strains, but it doesn't demonstrate it has a desirable impact on the beer. I could be wrong, but I suspect one strain of a multi-strain yeast determines most of the detectable yeast profile in the end product, and if they are closely related, which they're likely to be, the beer is going to be pretty comparable regardless which strain from a multi-strain yeast is use to ferment it.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
Isn't verdant ipa an English strain? It tastes at least English to me :D
Sorry, yes, apparently. For some reason I thought of an American strain. It doesn't really sound like my thing :D Especially if it's only available in dry format.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
Sorry, yes, apparently. For some reason I thought of an American strain. It doesn't really sound like my thing :D Especially if it's only available in dry format.
I thought the same. But this one really is different. Give it a try! I don't remember which one it is, but there is a liquid pendant to it which is literally not showing any difference in neither brewing properties nor resulting tastes.
 

cire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
454
Reaction score
290
Location
UK
LalBrew Verdant IPA™ – Ale Yeast. LalBrew® Verdant IPA was specially selected in collaboration with Verdant Brewing Co. (UK) for its ability to produce a variety of hop-forward and malty beers.

Interesting association and varied history at Verdant.

Our Beers
Hoppy, juicy, hazy, unfiltered, vegan-friendly beers! When Verdant began to bloom back in 2014, we decided that our focus would be hop-forward beers inspired by the New England craft beer scene. Over the last few years we’ve continued to develop both our core offerings such as Headband and Lightbulb, and special releases. We’ve placed an emphasis on balance and drinkability while taking inspiration from the beers of both the East and West Coasts of the United States.

Cornish water is very soft, so suited to those styles of beer.

@Miraculix How well does Verdant IPA yeast flocculate. The one I'm using currently (B4 from Brewlab) drops clear without finings in a few hours after rousing is stopped.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
LalBrew Verdant IPA™ – Ale Yeast. LalBrew® Verdant IPA was specially selected in collaboration with Verdant Brewing Co. (UK) for its ability to produce a variety of hop-forward and malty beers.

Interesting association and varied history at Verdant.

Our Beers
Hoppy, juicy, hazy, unfiltered, vegan-friendly beers! When Verdant began to bloom back in 2014, we decided that our focus would be hop-forward beers inspired by the New England craft beer scene. Over the last few years we’ve continued to develop both our core offerings such as Headband and Lightbulb, and special releases. We’ve placed an emphasis on balance and drinkability while taking inspiration from the beers of both the East and West Coasts of the United States.

Cornish water is very soft, so suited to those styles of beer.

@Miraculix How well does Verdant IPA yeast flocculate. The one I'm using currently (B4 from Brewlab) drops clear without finings in a few hours after rousing is stopped.
It flocs ok. It takes about three weeks after bottling to drop clear. Not a s04 but clearly also not a Windsor. It forms a nice compact sediment which doesn't get disturbed easily, so that's a big plus.
 

McMullan

wort maker
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Messages
355
Reaction score
331
It flocs ok. It takes about three weeks after bottling to drop clear. Not a s04 but clearly also not a Windsor. It forms a nice compact sediment which doesn't get disturbed easily, so that's a big plus.
Low flocculation and a top-cropping yeast head (very persistent/reluctant to drop according to some descriptions) suggest it might be more suited to a Burton Union system? If so, carefully skimming off the yeast head as FG approaches is probably better than leaving it, in terms of the beer going brighter sooner, before packaging ideally.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
Low flocculation and a top-cropping yeast head (very persistent/reluctant to drop according to some descriptions) suggest it might be more suited to a Burton Union system? If so, carefully skimming off the yeast head as FG approaches is probably better than leaving it, in terms of the beer going brighter sooner, before packaging ideally.
That's probably true. But quite a hassle with my fermenter, so I just play the waiting game. It's reasonably clear once the priming sugar is gone anyway, so it's ok for me. One to two weeks later it has fully cleared. It's a very easy to use yeast.

But the kräusen really is from another world.
 

Oleson M.D.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2021
Messages
128
Reaction score
112
Our go-to English Ale yeast is Fermentis S-04.

It made a spectacular English Barleywine and an English Imperial Stout. Both came in at over
10% ABV.

But it is rare that we brew ales. 99% of our beers are Euro style lagers.
 

cire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
454
Reaction score
290
Location
UK
Indeed, Verdant IPA seems more Burton like than a Yorkshire yeast.

I guess it to be a stock yeast of Lallemand. Verdant started at just 200 litre (53 US gallons) brewlength in 2014 with a minor upsizing in 2016. From their accounts it appears they then took a leaf or two from Brewdog's business model to significantly increase their business.
 

Miraculix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
4,944
Reaction score
3,349
Location
Bremen
I bought a sachet of it a week ago but haven't decided yet when and what do brew with it. Might try use it in my go to best bitter soon.
That's probably the best way to evaluate the yeast, with a tried and proven recipe. Let us know about the outcome!
 
Top