I have spoken to a fair few brewers who have used the dried Conan, and had plenty of beer made from it. I have also used it myself. It's definitely possible to get the Conan character from it, but if wet Conan isolates can be a bit unpredictable, then the dry format is predictable but not in a desirable way. It has a really, really low packaged cell count. They had a great deal of trouble getting a good cell count when drying it. That being the case it is really sluggish in generation 1, but behaves more like wet Conan in generation 2 onwards...but then you're back to handling wet yeast and some of the benefit disappears. I don't use it any more, I let WLP095 scratch my occasional Burlington itch.Any idea if those breweries have reported the NE to perform just like Conan? Keep wanting to try it but feedback is way more mixed compared to Verdant. I love Conan for, if nothing else, the improved attenuation and reasonable Krausen compared to London iii
Well, I can't be bothered to debate the meaning of isolate, but it is just London Ale III that went for a few generations and as a result took on some slight mutations. It's about as different from LAIII as London Fog is (another isolate of the same strain), it certainly does have a slightly more sweet yoghurt/apricot character than LAIII.Well...I am pretty sure they said they started with a London Ale III strain and this is based off their house strain that, after many generations, has some unique characters. I am not sure that means "1000% just an isolate".