NE IPA Dry Yeast

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

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

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I haven't yet, but my current plan is to pitch one pack of Windsor and one pack of S-04. I'll probably just rehydrate them together. Thinking of fermenting at 63 degrees F.
 
I have Windsor to use this weekend guessing that I will just pitch that and if the FG is still high after the Windsor has wrapped up will use s-05 or s-04 to bring it down the last few points, my worry is that you Windsor won't do the trick alone
 
no, but this might be available soon.....

fTv3WAz.jpg


posted by Verdant on their twatter page
 
nice hopefully my local brew shop will stock that when it is available to non pros
 
Hanglow said:
no, but this might be available soon.....

fTv3WAz.jpg


posted by Verdant on their twatter page
Click to expand...

Is that a dry yeast for NEIPA style beers?

Really?

And does it work? Is it like Conan, 1318, Burlington or something else?

Good gracious, that sounds like something that will sell a great deal of. Lallemand will get even richer...:D
 
No idea about the yeast, I just saw it on that breweries twitter feed. They are apparently trialing some dry brett too....
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
I haven't yet, but my current plan is to pitch one pack of Windsor and one pack of S-04. I'll probably just rehydrate them together. Thinking of fermenting at 63 degrees F.
Click to expand...

I've modified my thinking on this. Revised plan is to pitch 1/3 Fermentis S-O4, 1/3 Danstar Windsor, and 1/3 Danstar Munich Wheat. And to ferment at 64 degrees. Trying to introduce some POF+ genetic characteristics.

Wish I could get my hands onto some of that Danstar Lalbrew New England though...
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
I've modified my thinking on this. Revised plan is to pitch 1/3 Fermentis S-O4, 1/3 Danstar Windsor, and 1/3 Danstar Munich Wheat. And to ferment at 64 degrees. Trying to introduce some POF+ genetic characteristics.

Wish I could get my hands onto some of that Danstar Lalbrew New England though...
Click to expand...

I would use the Danstar Munich Classic, which is the W68 strain. ( there is a thread on this forum regarding it )
 
thehaze said:
I would use the Danstar Munich Classic, which is the W68 strain. ( there is a thread on this forum regarding it )
Click to expand...

I considered it, but it tosses up too much banana and clove. I'm concentrating on the tropical fruit characteristic.
 
So I guess people are not enthusiastic about the dry New England yeast from Lallemand, which apparently will be available soon...
 
day_trippr said:
^Sarcasm^? I didn't get that impression...
Click to expand...

Just a bit.

It is no secret that NEIPA has taken control over the " brewing " of most home brewers, especially with all the threads regarding different NEIPA clones are getting so much attention and especially the one, where some folks are trying to replicate the Treehouse character using a mix of dry yeats, which I find intoxicating to read and go through.

The Treehouse thread has actually made me, wanna brew different beers, using a mix of yeasts.

So a lot of work has been put in by people, in order to get that NEIPA yeast character, using dry yeast.

I would have thought that the news of a dry New England yeast would stir up some more... But I guess, it could also turn out to be disappointing...

Personally, I cannot wait to get my hands on it. Especially more, as I have grown tired of US-05, S-04, etc.

PS: some new belgian yeast in dry form would also make me and most of us, very happy.
 
How can the Danstar New England stir up enthusiasm when it doesn't exist yet for the public, and there is no hint of it on their website, and search engines don't even come up with hits for it? That said, I'm enthused.
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
How can the Danstar New England stir up enthusiasm when it doesn't exist yet for the public, and there is no hint of it on their website, and search engines don't even come up with hits for it? That said, I'm enthused.
Click to expand...

Point taken... I just spend enough time on this forum and I noticed this particular thread.

I have a brew fermenting with a dry yeast mix: 88% S-04, 9% T-58 and 3% WB-06 and very excited to see hjow it turns out.
 
I think part of it is that homebrewers are just a bit more grown-up than the fanbois who get excited about new phones and games consoles months if not years before release - by nature we're phlegmatic and patient, this hobby is all about delayed gratification!!!!

Also it's not like it's revolutionary, it's not going to turn firewood and old socks into Untappd-topping beer. Presumably it's just a dried version of a Conan strain or perhaps 1318 so it's not doing anything particularly "new", it's just the "same old" in a slightly cheaper and more convenient format. NEIPAs are relatively sophisticated beers - the volume of fancy hops means that by definition their brewers are a bit less price-sensitive, and if you're worrying about hop oxidation etc then you should be able to cope with liquid yeasts.

I'd argue that what the dry yeast market is really looking for is a dry version of the Norwegian farmhouse yeasts that are claimed to ferment "clean" up to 30C/90F. That's more relevant to the average dry-yeast user who is likely to have less sophisticated equipment and may not have temperature control of their fermentation.
 
day_trippr said:
Indeed. http://www.lallemandbrewing.com/product-details/lalbrew-new-england/

When it shows up at my lhbs I'll give it a try on half a 10 gallon batch and compare it to either Conan or 1318...

Cheers!
Click to expand...

It seems the page is not fully updated. The Microbiological Properties part states the following:

Classified as a Saccharomyces cerevisiae, a top fermenting yeast.
Typical Analysis of Abbaye Yeast:
Percent solids 93% – 97%
Living Yeast Cells ≥ 1 x 109 per gram of dry yeast
Wild Yeast < 1 per 106 yeast cells
Bacteria < 1 per 106 yeast cells
Finished product is released to the market only after passing a rigorous series of tests
*According to the ASBC and EBC methods of analysis
 
The flavor profile chart for LalBrew New England is hardly different from that of Windsor, with the only difference being one notch higher tropical. The greatest differences come from slow vs. ripping fast fermentation, decent vs. poor attenuation, and medium to high vs. abysmal flocculation.

Makes me wonder if combining S-04 and Windsor at 50/50 would give you close to the same thing. Presuming that S-04 can both boost the attenuation and help in flocculating the Windsor.

Also makes me wonder if LalBrew New England may actually make for a fantastic British Ale yeast. All of the desirable flavor characteristics of Windsor (and a single notch more in one ester category only), with none of the undesirable characteristics of Windsor.
 
I, for one, am super excited for that yeast, and for all of us in the world wide homebrew webs to start analyzing it to death and deciding what strain it came from.

FWIW I hate Windsor yeast more than any other. It stalls on me all the time, and when it does finish I think it tastes awful. The latter is probably more due to my poor temp control, but you&#8217;d thinking being hotter would eliminate the former problem.
 
The "Vermont" yeast aka "Conan" is supposed to be the yeast Boddingtons used in the 80s which was discovered to be Nottingham when one of the original brewers was tracked down and asked. When I used it in my NE IPA I got the same peachy apricot aromas. Which brewery was using Windsor originally?
 
malhal said:
The "Vermont" yeast aka "Conan" is supposed to be the yeast Boddingtons used in the 80s which was discovered to be Nottingham when one of the original brewers was tracked down and asked. When I used it in my NE IPA I got the same peachy apricot aromas. Which brewery was using Windsor originally?
Click to expand...

I tried to mention Nottingham over on the gene sequencing thread, and I was ignored.
 
How about Munton's Gold? I think it flocs well and leaves a few esters behind. Or, S-33, which is supposed to be the old Edme strain.

Also, there are Mangrove Jack yeasts, such as M15, Empire Ale (Haven't used this, though).
 
Silver_Is_Money said:
I tried to mention Nottingham over on the gene sequencing thread, and I was ignored.
Click to expand...

Not so much ignored, it was more that comments such as "[Nottingham] may hit a range of the desired DNA characteristics that are at presently requiring multiple yeasts" made it obvious that you had completely missed the point under discussion, I for one put it to one side to explain why when I had more time, and never got round to it.

But the short version is that thread was not "desiring" any DNA characteristics, they were completely irrelevant to the brewing process as they were merely being used as markers to distinguish different yeasts. Justin Bieber and Usain Bolt share certain stretches of DNA such as a Y chromosome, but that doesn't mean they have the same ability when it comes to running fast. But studying DNA does allow you to group humans into "men" and "women" based on whether they have a Y chromosome. (and yes, I know there are rare exceptions, but it's true to a first approximation) Conversely, Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce lacks that particular bit of DNA, but she can still run fast (double Olympic 100m gold medallist among other things). So looking at the "wrong" bit of DNA tells you nothing about ability in a certain field, but it can still be useful to look at DNA for identification purposes.

For the purposes of that thread, all that matters is what Nottingham is like to brew with - and I guess it would work fine as a substitute for the S-04 component of the Tree House blend, but it doesn't generate enough esters and phenolics to substitute for the Belgian bits. Same's true for several other "moderately British" dry yeasts like M36 - I have the latter in a blend with T-58 and WB-06 carbing at the moment.

And yes, it seems Nottingham is a blend - rumour has it that it's 70% a "lager" strain, but probably a high-temperature strain (think steam beer) rather than a classic cold-temperature strain. But that doesn't really help with esters and phenolics, quite the opposite in fact.

Munton's Gold is allegedly the Fuller's strain (WLP002/1968) so I can't see a reason for that not to work, some people don't like too much floccculation though. I know a lot of people aren't the biggest fan of S-33 for general use but it could work in this context. Same is also true of M15, but I've got a packet waiting to play with at the moment.
 
Last edited:
On friday i shall try a neipa made with this. The brewer claims it was not as estery as he was expecting.

Tbh Ive had really great results with london esb, first time i used it i severely underpitched by almost 50% and the beast still reached final gravity in 3 days,controlling its initial vigurous fermentation is essential to avoid ester volatilisation. If the info of the aroma fact sheet is correct, it should a tropical fruit bomb since i has 3 marks for tropal fruit aroma, london esb only has 1 and at higher ferm temps it stinks!
 
Seems the Lallemand dry New England yeast was officially launched on 13 November, https://twitter.com/LallemandBrewUK is filling up with examples of breweries using it for production brews, including the likes of Cloudwater. They've also got a new dry Lactobacillus plantarum, which is the first in a new WildBrew range that presumably will include the Brett mentioned above.

Tech specs are here : http://www.lallemandbrewing.com/product-details/lalbrew-new-england/
In Lallemand’s Standard Conditions Wort at 20°C (68°F) LalBrew™ New England yeast exhibits:

Fermentation that can be completed in 7 days, a bit slower than most ale strains. This is a normal and perfectly natural characteristic of this strain.

Medium to high attenuation and Medium flocculation.

Neutral to slightly fruity and estery flavor and aroma.

The optimal temperature range for LalBrew™ New England yeast when producing traditional styles is 15°C(59°F) to
22°C(72°F).

Lag phase can be longer when compared with other strains, ranging from 24-36 hours.
Click to expand...

This is my first sighting of it available to UK customers (and in stock!) but at GBP82.50 for a 500g pack to trade customers, it's twice the price of eg Nottingham. No sign of the 11g packs yet.
 
Last edited:
I've brewed NEIPA's with windsor, london esb, so4, us05, nottingham and a house wet yeast. Biggest drawbacks with windsor (worse) and london esb (marginally better) is the lack of flocculation, it'll look like milk (which is fine) but without significant fining/cold crashing efforts can throw yeast in the glass on serving (which is not fine). Windsor can be done in under 36 hours and london esb under 58 which for me translates to needing great temperature control as the temperature rockets.

I prefer the flavour of windsor over london esb and without significant simple sugars windsor doesn't like finishing below 12 (but is reliable) and the london esb usually stops at between 14 and 16. The trick with these is to make sure a relatively large portion of extract come from sugar to avoid the high FG, it will ferment dry and don't try to mash high or bring anything like crystal to the mix to avoid beer which finishes at 20+!

so4 and us05 just do the work and are relatively neutral, nottingham and our wet yeast (hales/gales derived strain) also reliable, but not so neutral. All will easily drop clear given adequate handling though nottingham can produce a slightly tart finish and our wet yeast a dry (overtly bitter) minerally (sessionable) quality neither work quite as well as the slightly sweet and fruity windsor. Windsor (lesser extent) and london esb (much more) seem to smell strongly sulphurous immediately after fermentation though this clears up. I would be interested to compare the new NEIPA yeast, but would be unlikely to use london esb again over windsor.
 
stz said:
I've brewed NEIPA's with windsor, london esb, so4, us05, nottingham and a house wet yeast. Biggest drawbacks with windsor (worse) and london esb (marginally better) is the lack of flocculation, it'll look like milk (which is fine) but without significant fining/cold crashing efforts can throw yeast in the glass on serving (which is not fine). Windsor can be done in under 36 hours and london esb under 58 which for me translates to needing great temperature control as the temperature rockets.

I prefer the flavour of windsor over london esb and without significant simple sugars windsor doesn't like finishing below 12 (but is reliable) and the london esb usually stops at between 14 and 16. The trick with these is to make sure a relatively large portion of extract come from sugar to avoid the high FG, it will ferment dry and don't try to mash high or bring anything like crystal to the mix to avoid beer which finishes at 20+!

so4 and us05 just do the work and are relatively neutral, nottingham and our wet yeast (hales/gales derived strain) also reliable, but not so neutral. All will easily drop clear given adequate handling though nottingham can produce a slightly tart finish and our wet yeast a dry (overtly bitter) minerally (sessionable) quality neither work quite as well as the slightly sweet and fruity windsor. Windsor (lesser extent) and london esb (much more) seem to smell strongly sulphurous immediately after fermentation though this clears up. I would be interested to compare the new NEIPA yeast, but would be unlikely to use london esb again over windsor.
Click to expand...


Interesting to hear a different experience of the esb. I for one have had beautiful smells from it at high temps, around 23ish and lower to 17 after 24 h, over ripe apples with a complementing generic tropical fruit almost in equal proportions.
You are correct on its attenuation, i always throw in a tiny bit of sugar to help it dry out. Last brew i didnt really account for high gravity and probably ended up pitching at 50%, the ****er still went from 1079 to 1020 in 3 days, 1079 to 1044 in 24h. No hot alcohols can be perceived when tasting, i suppose from the abrupt temperature fall.
 
I tried a neipa yesterday made with the new lallemand neipa yeast and meh, i was expecting a ton more. Neutral if anything slightly alcoholic but thats it. And i know the brewer tried to get those esters going.... I think its a miss.
 
KLITE said:
I tried a neipa yesterday made with the new lallemand neipa yeast and meh, i was expecting a ton more. Neutral if anything slightly alcoholic but thats it. And i know the brewer tried to get those esters going.... I think its a miss.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... That would be a shame if this yeast does not add anything to the NEIPA style.

But from the spec sheet, it could possibly be a new US-05, due to its similar flocculation, high attenuation and the neutral to slightly fruitty profile. I am yet not able to get the smaller sachets, only the bigger 500gr pack, but when it will be available, I will brew some batches to see what it got.
 
I would not read much negative into it. A single report devoid of any specific details should not discourage anyone, but perhaps should raise eyebrows.
 
I am not. I want to try it myself at home and also want to hear more experiences from both homebrewers and commercial brewers, which had tried this yeast. But I guess we have to wait some months for that to happen.

I think the summer of 2018 will probably be the time where the yeast has been on the shelves enough, to draw some *hopefully* meaninful conclusions.

But I am still psyched for this yeast. I would kinda like this yeast to be the new US-05, but with a better ester formation and flavours.
 

Similar threads

O
LALBREW NEW ENGLAND v VERDANT IPA
Replies
2
Views
2K
whattabrau
W
madscientist451
IPA malt just BS marketing?
Replies
11
Views
435
BrewnWKopperKat
BrewnWKopperKat
M
Alora
Replies
4
Views
318
mschoeffler
M
C
Cold ipa yeast question
Replies
8
Views
591
rtstrider
rtstrider
HoundboundCo
DRY HOPPING
Replies
6
Views
436
vin8n1
V

Latest posts

Back
Top