Yeasts you have had zero success with

[ShortSnoutBrewing]

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

 

[boxcar]

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

wow, my problem with nottingham has been the opposite, it eats every freakin sugar in the beer and dries it out too much.

 

[Montanaandy]

Count me in with respect to not being a fan of 05. I really have not had a bad experience with any Wyeast yeast strain knock on wood.

Interesting to hear that someone does not like Pacman. I have used it on a number I'd different IPA's and IIPA's with great results. One of my favorites. Montanaandy

 

[boxcar]

I guess everyone tastes and procedures are different, I love us-05 for all my apa's, american IPA's.

 

[DrinksWellWithOthers]

I've also had mixed results with 1028. I've used it twice and when I bottled the beer it was so minerally it tasted like I was licking rocks. It's gotten better with time (about 3 months) but its still there and sometimes more than others.

 

[rcrabb22]

Danstar Windsor. Three separate brews and have never done better than 55% attenuation and it convinced me to keg. I had a failed bottle condition with it. Flat and sweet Nut Brown kit billed as an easy no fail brew. It was an early attempt but to I had no temp control at that point and fermented on the warm side, probably 70F.

 

[elkdog]

Danstar Windsor. Three separate brews and have never done better than 55% attenuation and it convinced me to keg. I had a failed bottle condition with it. Flat and sweet Nut Brown kit billed as an easy no fail brew. It was an early attempt but to I had no temp control at that point and fermented on the warm side, probably 70F.

Try WLP002 if you want the slightly sweeter English character, and WLP005 for the drier character. I'm about to bottle an ESB made with the 005, and it's fantastic- like a great English ale. Windsor's a product I don't have any love for.

Interesting to see Nottingham on this list. I'll not argue, but I love the way it dries out a beer. I love dry, crisp pale ales, so it's my favorite for those.

 

[kwhyte]

I will never use Nottingham again. Maybe the timing was bad and I got some of their recalled packets, but even the ones they sent me to replace them didn't do it. Poor attenuation, having to repitch, etc. Never again...

And yeah, what's wrong with Pacman?

I'll second this - I've only tries Nottingham twice, and neither actually worked, meaning that both times I eventually had to pitch (s-05 once and s-04 once) to save the day. So I don't know what I'd think of Notty that did its thing, it may be a great yeast, but the quality control problems make me feel like it's just not worth trying again given all the other good yeasts out there. I have some replacement packs they sent me after I reported my problems, so if it turns out they have solved their issues then I'll give it a try but for now there are still new posts of problems with recent batches (it seems like almost daily).

Otherwise I've had good luck with all the yeasts I've used - the s04 and s05 others complain about have both been good for me, as have 34/70 for lagers and wyeast's 1968, 1028, 1098, 1318, 1275 and 1450. It may help that my basement has been at 58-60 ambient, so I've had all the ferments nice and cool. When it is warmer this summer there could be more difficulties.

Grains are a different story - I've used brown malt when I probably shouldn't have and the results have been almost undrinkable. I'll probably try it again but only in a recipe others can vouch for. I will never use Briess Munich again - it's made from 6-row, which I would never have guessed to ask about but after tasting the results in more than one beer it was clear something was off, and I eventually figured out what. That has turned me off of Briess in general - are any of their products high quality?

 

[gubby]

US-05. HATE it. Gave it a couple of tries, fermented the beers in the mid 60s and the resulting beer was super estery. Dumped one and am trying to age the other out. I'll never use it again.

I am in this camp. US-05 is definitely more estery than the WLP001 and Wyeast 1056. I have used all three and will not go back to US-05 unless I'm in a pinch. I don't hate US-05 as much as MattHollingsworth, but the liquid counterparts produce cleaner beers and allow the hop complexity to show through more on American PAs and IPAs.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

I think in the case of liquid yeast (and perhaps dry as well), sometimes we get a package that has been handled poorly, we use it and get poor results, and then we naturally think we we don't like the yeast. I had poor results with Denny's Fave 50 but after reading other's comments on it I think I just got an unhealthy packet. I washed it and made a brew with the washed yeast and it was better than the orig batch but still sluggish/underattenuated so I tossed the rest. But other than that I really can't think of a yeast, that I used more just once, that I had zero success with. Sometimes I'm not crazy about the initial batch but I usually like the second or third batch from washed yeast and I tend to base it more on that.

 

[petep1980]

And naturally everyone loves my porter made with 1028.

 

[Ichthy]

wow, my problem with nottingham has been the opposite, it eats every freakin sugar in the beer and dries it out too much.

+1000 Gives me dry beer every time.

 

[jjones17]

Windsor - Hands down. I use that beer for slug traps and baking beer cakes only. <shudder>