New bad lot of Nottingham yeast ???

[RavenChief]

There seems to be a slow starting trend with Lot number 1080961099V exp 12.2011. Is this a new batch of bad yeast?

Are there other bad lots out there also?

I think I will start "proofing" my dry yeast just to be safe...

Anyone know what other yeast has the same properties as Danstar Nottingham? I have some SF-04 which I have been told is close. Or is it SF-05 that is close to Nottingham?

 

[BeerNoob]

I just picked up a pack of the same Nottingham yesterday. I proofed it and noticed that it didn't foam the same as it usually does during the proof. I didn't panic because I usually use the Windsor yeast and assumed this one would just behave differently.

I pitched as usual and now, 24 hours later, there is still no head in my primary and VERY little activity.

I phoned the supplier and told them what was happening and said that it seems that the yeast they sold me is bad and they essentially told me "that's impossible, you probably killed it somehow".

Have to love the crap service you get everywhere you go in Canada.

I'm not sure what to do now, all the brewing suppliers are closed and I'm worried that my wort is going to get infected if my yeast isn't doing it's job.

 

[Shooter]

Only 24 hours without activity?!? I don't think it's really time to panic yet.

 

[BeerNoob]

I wouldn't say I'm panicking right now but I'm still new to brewing and haven't encountered all of the potential problems yet so I don't quite know how to deal with certain things that come up.

I'm mostly disappointed with the service I received from the supplier and I'm a little stressed about this batch because my last 3 have failed due to some bad advice I got and this would be #4.

I'll keep an eye on it and report back. It seems like the Nottingham, for the most part, have been slow to start and don't outright fail. All I can do now is wait and in the mean time I'll pick up a couple more packets and keep them on hand in case I need to re-pitch.

 

[Shooter]

I don't mean this to be rude, honestly, but you say you're new to brewing, but joined this forum in 2008?!!?

I'd let that beer sit for another 24 to 48 hours and see how it goes. At that point take a hydrometer reading to confirm that nothing has been happening. I've had beers that fermented out without any airlock activity.

 

[BeerNoob]

Well, due to my frequent failures I don't brew a lot even though I first joined in 2008. This is my 6th batch ever and my last 3 were failures.

As I said, I will keep an eye on it and see if anything develops. As it is now, everything looks good other than the fact that there's little to no yeast activity.

 

[marc06]

Have to love the crap service you get everywhere you go in Canada.

Your beers are turing out like crap because its karma coming to bite you in the ass for comments like this...

 

[JuanMoore]

S-05 would be closer to Nottingham than S-04. About 2 weeks ago I tried to use 4 packets of Nottingham from the same lot number as posted above. I always rehydrate my yeast, and noticed that 2 out of the 4 hardly foamed up at all and had a nasty smell to them. I poured them down the drain and pitched some S-05 instead. Between this and the issues I had with the recall batch, I think I might be done with Danstar yeasts.

 

[Austinhomebrew]

Lets don't start rumors. Contact the manufacturer for answers not a forum.

Forrest

 

[Dauntless]

Just pitched with this lot number a couple of hours ago. We'll see how it turns out but I'm not worried.

Btw, my sachet says made in Austria. Usually marks made in Denmark. Maybe they're marked differently for the American market. Or they only send the bad ones for BeerNoob. ;p

 

[Brewenstein]

My brew partner and I made a 12 gallon batch of Ed's pale ale last weekend. We split it into 2 fermenters and pitched a packet of rehydrated Notty into each one. One took off within 12 hours and the other took 36 to show activity. When I mentioned this, my brew partner said that when he hydrated the yeast, one got foamy and the other didn't. They both were from this lot number. I guess that the real test will be in couple of weeks when I sample each one. I will post the taste results then.

 

[Rover]

The samples of this slow Notty will taste like crap (very yeasty fermented at 65). I had to let BM's Centennial Blond condition for over a month to loose the yeast taste. Fermentation took over a week with a 72 hour lag time with this lot#

 

[r2eng]

I have the same lot/date as you do and it is amazing...

I have pitched one after rehydrating, and it finished in 72 hours. I made a starter for a big IIPA, and it kicked in 2 hours, finished in 48!

Patience...

 

[Rover]

Why is this lot# so inconsistent? Many people, experienced and noobs, are having different results with this batch.

 

[Austinhomebrew]

If the yeast lot number is the constant what is the variable?
Talk to the manufacturer.

Forrest

 

[Clayton]

If the yeast lot number is the constant what is the variable?
Talk to the manufacturer.

Forrest

the BREWER AND METHOD

 

[BeerNoob]

Your beers are turing out like crap because its karma coming to bite you in the ass for comments like this...

Yeah... you're probably right... it definitely isn't science or poor method that's causing my batches to fail. KARMA GODS STRIKE AGAIN!

 

[mullenite]

I'm drinking a Brown Ale fermented with this batch right now and it's fine. Fermented out in about 3 days, with about 6 hours lag time according to my notes.

 

[BeerNoob]

Just checked my batch again, a healthy head of foam has started, it's roughly 1/4 inch thick.

Took 26 hours after pitching for any yeast activity to be visible.

 

[Rover]

If the yeast lot number is the constant what is the variable?
Talk to the manufacturer.

Forrest

Yeah, I understand but why don't you hear so many different brewers complain about US-05 or the like.

When I rehydrated the yeast it all sank to the bottom of the cup to a weird looking mess, no foaming at all in two hour time frame. Is that what good Notty does? Also after 36 hours after pitching I gave my fermenter a stir and I could still see the shape of the little yeast pellets floating in my wort.

I'll admit that I'm not that experienced of a brewer but have a culinary education and I understand the importance of correct procedure. I do have enough experience with dry yeast to know something wasn't right with the Notty I used. What I experienced and what many others are experiencing isn't what good yeast should be doing.

 

[BobBailey]

I haven't turned out a bad beer with Notty, but have definately noticed a lot longer lag times, less vigorous fermentation and lower attenuation since they went to the new packaging. Notty was my favorite yeast for a variety of beer styles for a couple of years. Now I use S-04, US-05 and S-33 for most everything but stouts.

 

[tagz]

I used this lot # on a amarillo blonde two weeks ago. Fermentation started overnight with rehydration; <12 hours after pitching. Batch fermented out (1.008) in 4 days at ~68*. Samples tasted good.

 

[Dauntless]

Got a krausen forming after 12 hours.

 

[Rover]

I used this lot # on a amarillo blonde two weeks ago. Fermentation started overnight with rehydration; <12 hours after pitching. Batch fermented out (1.008) in 4 days at ~68*. Samples tasted good.

Looks good, you're one who got a nice quick start.

 

[Ricand]

The samples of this slow Notty will taste like crap (very yeasty fermented at 65). I had to let BM's Centennial Blond condition for over a month to loose the yeast taste. Fermentation took over a week with a 72 hour lag time with this lot#

I used it in BMCB too. The yeast never did clean up the Acetylaldehide and my blonde had a crisp green apple finish. Wasn't entirely unpleasant and I've only got a couple gallons left of the original 10. I'm too chicken to use Danstar again though.

To the OP, I always keep a couple packs of US05 around JIC. It's got decent shelf life and can always ferment out pretty much anything. If I were in your shoes, I'd make darn sure I had a backup.

 

[breez7]

Never had any probs with Notty, always bubbling away when I wake up in the morning!!! But I only use dry yeast when I'm lazy or brewing unexpectedly.

 

[Shooter]

I'm assuming everyone who is reporting a problem with this yeast is reporting it to Danstar?!!?? Personally, I've never had a problem with Nottingham yeast. It has always worked great. I'm not totally convinced that there is a problem. You get one or two people reporting a problem and suddenly every Johnny come lately who has an issue with a beer starts claiming that their crappy sanitation/inability to control ferment temps/underpitching are clearly a result of a defective packet of yeast. If there is a problem, let Danstar know. They have been pretty good in the past at taking care of problem batches.

 

[stevedasleeve]

the BREWER AND METHOD

It is just too easy to make pot shots when you have not had the same experience. I have used Nottingham for 90% of my last 100 gallons, no problems, great beer, same process for the most part and, um , same brewer.

I pitched Nottingham last week, same lot number, and got a very long lag time and not much activity, VERY different from anything I have experienced before with this yeast. I do think there is something going on with this lot. I emailed the mfg and have not heard back.

I'm likely to keep this batch 2 weeks in primary and 1 week in secondary so I won't know for 4-5 weeks or so if this beer was compromised.

 

[reinbrew]

Does Kool-aid ferment? I was curious and threw one pack of this lot number. After a week of no activity, I went to the store and threw a second in. I'm now pushing 3 weeks since the start and after seeing this thread, I will contact Danstar.

But seriously has anyone tried to ferment Kool-Aid?

 

[D-Ring]

I had 2 bad batches and have used Notty a lot in the past.