Nottingham Yeast recall

[The Pol]

Postage was $1.00 even for me

 

[Teacher]

I'm guessing HBT helped with that - I know it was EdWort that got the dude from Danstar to chime in on here....

HBT - saving the world one yeast recall at a time.

But like I said in my other post - the slow starts I had haven't seemed to affect the final product....

See, that's why I'm wondering why so many have made a big deal out of this. I had two slow-starting batches from Notty, but the final beers were just exactly as expected. I don't have a problem with less vigorous activity, so I'm not sure why it's such a huge deal.

 

[ShortSnoutBrewing]

I pitched my notty and got little to no activity and could only get a 1.052 brew down to 1.025. Repitching did nothing as well. It goes beyond a slow start.

 

[The Pol]

I pitched my notty and got little to no activity and could only get a 1.052 brew down to 1.025. Repitching did nothing as well. It goes beyond a slow start.

Whiner....

 

[ShortSnoutBrewing]

Damn straight! If it wasn't for HBT and the threads on this I would have actually thought I was the one that did something wrong. That's just not possible!

 

[dcs]

From Oregon, mine was 79 cents for a envelope with 2 empties and 1 full pack of yeast.

ETA - in my personal opinion, I think it's likely that Can customs will halt a good number of these. No offense, but they are a royal pain.

 

[dcs]

See, that's why I'm wondering why so many have made a big deal out of this. I had two slow-starting batches from Notty, but the final beers were just exactly as expected. I don't have a problem with less vigorous activity, so I'm not sure why it's such a huge deal.

Yeast conversion of sugars to alc releases CO2.

There are some posts on this topic about how "my beer went from 1.55 to 1.15 with no airlock activity and all is well."

Hmmm. Where'd the gas go? Is it magic yeast?

Other posters comment on a slow start and fermentation, but conclude that all is well, no big deal.

I'll betcha that if Lallemand came out and said that they had found a new yeast strain that is guaranteed to start within 14 days and may take a month but will get the job done eventually, and they were abandoning their other product lines in favor of this one yeast, and by the way, maybe you'll get some bubbles and maybe you won't, well, they'd be out of business pretty quick.

I mean, let's don't kid ourselves. They have a problem of some kind. Sure, there are some loyal Nott-heads D) sticking up for them, but how long would that last if Lallemand were to come out with something outrageous like the unlikely scenario above?

This same lot of yeast is either...
- perfect
- slow but okay eventually
- dead and rotten
...depending on who's talking.

That is some really sucky quality control somewhere. Isn't a "lot" supposed to be a description of a batch of product made and packaged during one production run, and expected to exhibit consistent and reliable characteristics and performance? How big is this lot? How long have they been making it?

In my case (a rotten beer), it's a "huge deal" for me.

I'm not retired. I have kids who play sports and I have a job and I fish and hunt and play golf and blah blah blah.

If I put 8 hours into a batch of beer, I want the beer. That 8 hours is not meaningless to me.

YMMV.

 

[EMPyre]

Just pitched a Schwarz Ale with Notty... I ordered this mail order this week, knowing about this recall. My packet wasn't in the recall lot, but... The damn thing was open, the bottom seal wasn't joined completely. I didn't notice until today as I was laying out my materials and couldn't get to the local store to check for a different brand. My starter was flat and I'm pretty worried about this. I mean dead, not a single bubble, no bread dough smell, even the fruit flies in the garage were ignoring it. I'll be calling the HBS tomorrow, but I'm thinking about trying to find a suitable replacement to repitch ASAP and avoiding this brand in the future. Any suggestions?

 

[Hound_Dog]

My 5-gal porter is ruined. It has an overriding flavor that is hard to describe: something akin to old bananas with aromas of trash-can.

I have a batch of Ed's pale with this exact same flavor. It's beyond horrible, but mine has been in bottles for 5 weeks.

And if anyone's curious it fermented at 66F.

 

[smizak]

What I would really like to know is how many brewers have used Nottingham packets that were manufactured AFTER the alleged bad lot, and how the yeast performed.

Anyone?

 

[EMPyre]

That's hard to say, my packet didn't have a packaging date on it, and who knows if the lot numbers are consecutive...

I'm pretty upset that 1) this packet left the assembly line, it was obviously opened, 2) that this packet left the HBS in a mail order, it was obviously opened, and dropping yeast grains, 3) that I didn't pay closer attention when checking my order on Wednesday for a brew session on Sunday, it was obviously opened!

 

[Mongo64]

I have a batch of Ed's pale with this exact same flavor. It's beyond horrible, but mine has been in bottles for 5 weeks.

And if anyone's curious it fermented at 66F.

I have a batch of Centennial Blonde that's been bottled for one week. Beyond horrible is a good description. I would describe it as something between rotten onions and clove. Just nasty and nothing like the previous lot. I'm considering just dumping the whole batch to avoid ever tasting this again. I highly doubt it will improve enough to be drinkable.

 

[yeoldebrewer]

I have a batch of Ed's pale with this exact same flavor. It's beyond horrible, but mine has been in bottles for 5 weeks.

And if anyone's curious it fermented at 66F.

Yipes. I have a small batch of pale ale with the same problem and fermented at 65 deg. I'm hesitant to blame the Notty because there are still weak points in my process. Throw in a touch of wet cardboard, and the flavor is close to described.

This just for the record. My process is far from perfect.

 

[WollenBrew]

Okay, just a theory here. Nottingham switched their packaging company. Since the switch, there has been a recall of one batch of the yeast, however, home brewers all across this board have mentioned, slow starts, poor attenuation and hugely off flavors. To be fair, there have also been brewers who have stated that their beers fermented fine and the flavors were fine.

Let's look at the one thing that changed: the packaging. Is it possible that there is some chemical being used that is killing off the yeast while it's in the package? (Slow to start ferments because of fewer yeast cells to begin with) and is it possible that if there is some chemical doing this that it's also contributing to the off flavors? If so, how do we account for the brewers who have had good luck with the Notty?

I know there are a lot of chemists that brew and frequent this board and a lot of brewmeisters who have been doing this for years. Can anyone maybe pinpoint a chemical used in packaging processes that might be affecting the yeast in this manner?

 

[smizak]

It's a little hard to follow this, but I'm trying to figure out if there are still problems with the yeast outside of the particular lot number. I've used Notty before and liked it, and was going to get into brewing some more English ales.

Is it safe to say they solved the problem?

 

[The Pol]

It's a little hard to follow this, but I'm trying to figure out if there are still problems with the yeast outside of the particular lot number. I've used Notty before and liked it, and was going to get into brewing some more English ales.

Is it safe to say they solved the problem?

Notty is just a highly flocculant and clean yeast... you can use 1056, S-05 etc. as a sub. Would you prefer something like Windsor or S-04 for an english ale?

 

[roylee]

Hope someone will let us know when they get their replacement.... I sent in several packets nearly 3 weeks ago and nothing.

 

[The Pol]

Hope someone will let us know when they get their replacement.... I sent in several packets nearly 3 weeks ago and nothing.

I sent mine in as soon as this recall came out... but in hindsight I dont expect to see any replacement packets. They have so much bad yeast out there to replace, I dont have much faith that my little envelope will make it through. I could be wrong though.

I am glad that they did the recall and everything, but I think I will stick with S-05 from here on out so that I dont have any question about yeast quality.

 

[ShortSnoutBrewing]

Folks, we have to remember a few things here...first, Canada is a different country. All these envelopes full of little packets have to go through Customs. That can take FOREVER. I'm going to guess that most of us didn't put a customs form on the envelopes. This will delay even more.

On top of that, not only are they going to have individuals sending back in yeast, but retailers as well. I was in my LHBS last week and they had no Notty and a sign informing about the recall.

In my experience with these sorts of things I say wait 6 - 8 weeks minimum...That's just the way it goes.

 

[smizak]

Notty is just a highly flocculant and clean yeast... you can use 1056, S-05 etc. as a sub. Would you prefer something like Windsor or S-04 for an english ale?

I could, but US-05 is clean, not flocculant. Notty's clean AND flocculant nature, as well as being a dry yeast, is what is attractive to me.

Just wondered if the really figured this out yet before I go back to it.

 

[EMPyre]

I am glad that they did the recall and everything, but I think I will stick with S-05 from here on out so that I dont have any question about yeast quality.

+1, bought some US-05 last night to repitch Sunday's brew, and a little more just to have one hand... Won't be picking up any Notty any time soon.

 

[klemcke]

Thanks for the frank comments on this forum, and to alerting us to the fermentation problems of this batch of Nottingham several weeks ago. Just a bit more on the cause of the problem in case some of you haven't seen this posted elsewhere.

Our subsequent investigations have shown that in the packaging process of Nottingham batch #1081140118V, the device used to imprint the lot number and expiration date caused tiny punctures in the sachet packaging material, allowing air to get into the package. Prolonged contact with air will affect the performance of the yeast, resulting in changes in fermentation performance over time. This has affected a minority of the yeast sachets in this batch but as a precaution we have decided to replace the entire batch of Nottingham sachets. This was an isolated incident and prior and subsequent batches were not affected. The printing device has been upgraded with a different type of printing ribbon to prevent a reoccurrence.

We again apologize to those who have been affected by this problem and hope you will continue to use Danstar yeast in the future.

Keith Lemcke
Danstar & Lalvin Yeast

 

[knightbeer39]

Thanks for taking the time to post that here. I just sent some recalled sachets in to you guys today. Hey, if you are making it right, then I don't know why people should complain. I will continue to use your product...

 

[EMPyre]

Keith, might want to check the sealing mechanism as well. Like I posted earlier, I had a sachet with at least 1/4 inch of the bottom 3 band seal completely missed. Its like the heating element never even touched the packaging material there...

 

[njnear76]

I kegged the blonde I made September 6th with Nottingham, although I wish I didn't. Over three weeks and the thing still was not clear. The batch had an apfelwein like flavor and was slightly sweet. Not enough sweetness to be disgusting, but enough to overpower the hop bitterness.

It might improve, but I'm really mythed at the slowness. There was lots of yeast reproduction as evidenced by the sediment in the carboy, but it seems like these yeast have a lot of trouble converting the sugars.

On a postive note, the recent batch I made with Nottingham took off like crazy.

 

[Homercidal]

I kegged the blonde I made September 6th with Nottingham, although I wish I didn't. Over three weeks and the thing still was not clear. The batch had an apfelwein like flavor and was slightly sweet. Not enough sweetness to be disgusting, but enough to overpower the hop bitterness.

It might improve, but I'm really mythed at the slowness. There was lots of yeast reproduction as evidenced by the sediment in the carboy, but it seems like these yeast have a lot of trouble converting the sugars.

On a postive note, the recent batch I made with Nottingham took off like crazy.

I made a batch of blonde this summer that never cleared. Had a funny flavor tha tmay have been too high initial ferm temps. Hard to tell. The clarity was a bit mystifying to me because I've brewed this recipe before and have had great clarity. I cannot think of any cause for it, even yeast. Strange that you experienced this as well. FYI - I do not know about the serial number because I had used the yeast weeks before hearing about the recall.

 

[njnear76]

I made a batch of blonde this summer that never cleared. Had a funny flavor tha tmay have been too high initial ferm temps. Hard to tell. The clarity was a bit mystifying to me because I've brewed this recipe before and have had great clarity. I cannot think of any cause for it, even yeast. Strange that you experienced this as well. FYI - I do not know about the serial number because I had used the yeast weeks before hearing about the recall.

Yeah. I don't know the Nottingham yeast batch number for my blond either. But, I do know that I fermented at 55-63F. Maybe I should throw in new yeast?

 

[Edcculus]

Our subsequent investigations have shown that in the packaging process of Nottingham batch #1081140118V, the device used to imprint the lot number and expiration date caused tiny punctures in the sachet packaging material, allowing air to get into the package.

The printing device has been upgraded with a different type of printing ribbon to prevent a reoccurrence.

Keith Lemcke
Danstar & Lalvin Yeast

Have you considered a non contact printing method. There are several one color variable data/sequential numbering inkjet heads available out there.

 

[yeoldebrewer]

Any manufacturer claiming they have never had glitches in their process is not being truthful. It looks like Danstar is addressing this one in a timely manner. IMHO, that's what counts.

 

[KopyKat]

I sent a dozen of this lot number on 9/3/09 back to:

Lallemand Inc.
Attn: Marie Coppet
6100 Royalmount
Montreal, QC, Canada
H4P 2R2

I have received no response to date. I sent an email to '[email protected]' on 9/20 to check up on what was happening with the return and never got an answer. I just sent an email to Steve to see if he can help. Hopefully I haven't just sent a dozen sachets of notty on a tour of Canada.