Liquid sub for Danstar Nottingham?

[scarper11 (Pinski)]

I’m going to be helping a friend brew a recipe of his choice that calls for Danstar Nottingham but I’d rather use liquid yeast that I have access to in greater quantity without the need of making a starter.  Any thoughts on substituting with Wyeast 1318 or 1968? I haven’t heard of or seen a “liquid equivalent” for Nottingham.

[hopfenundmalz]

White Labs has a seasonal that is liquid Nottingham. Too lazy to see when.

[morticaixavier]

Not a direct answer to your question but the danstar nottingham is a dry yeast right? I don’t think you need, or want for that matter, to make a starter with that. Unless you only have one packet and are brewing 10-20 gallon batch. but for a ‘normal’ gravity (1.050ish) 5 gallon batch one packet of nottingham rehydrated in warm water will be plenty.

If it is a british ale Ordinary bitter ESB thing I think that the 1968 is great. it works fast and thouroughly. It clears nicely but it does produce a fair amount of diacetyl in the process. So you might want to bring the temp up a few degrees at the end to clean that up. Haven’t tried the 1318.

[scarper11 (Pinski)]

@morticaixavier

Not a direct answer to your question but the danstar nottingham is a dry yeast right? I don’t think you need, or want for that matter, to make a starter with that. Unless you only have one packet and are brewing 10-20 gallon batch. but for a ‘normal’ gravity (1.050ish) 5 gallon batch one packet of nottingham rehydrated in warm water will be plenty.

If it is a british ale Ordinary bitter ESB thing I think that the 1968 is great. it works fast and thouroughly. It clears nicely but it does produce a fair amount of diacetyl in the process. So you might want to bring the temp up a few degrees at the end to clean that up. Haven’t tried the 1318.

Yes, the Nottingham I’m aware of is dry so I wouldn’t make a starter with it.  The reason I mention 1968 and 1318 is that I can get enough of those strains that I wouldn’t have to make a starter for them either.  This is for a 25 gallon batch. I’ve used the 1318 and liked it, haven’t tried 1968. Good to know about the diacetyl.  Thanks Mort!

[morticaixavier]

@morticaixavier

Not a direct answer to your question but the danstar nottingham is a dry yeast right? I don’t think you need, or want for that matter, to make a starter with that. Unless you only have one packet and are brewing 10-20 gallon batch. but for a ‘normal’ gravity (1.050ish) 5 gallon batch one packet of nottingham rehydrated in warm water will be plenty.

If it is a british ale Ordinary bitter ESB thing I think that the 1968 is great. it works fast and thouroughly. It clears nicely but it does produce a fair amount of diacetyl in the process. So you might want to bring the temp up a few degrees at the end to clean that up. Haven’t tried the 1318.

Yes, the Nottingham I’m aware of is dry so I wouldn’t make a starter with it.  The reason I mention 1968 and 1318 is that I can get enough of those strains that I wouldn’t have to make a starter for them either.  This is for a 25 gallon batch. I’ve used the 1318 and liked it, haven’t tried 1968. Good to know about the diacetyl.  Thanks Mort!

Ahh I see. yeah I really like 1968

[jrdunne (Joe Sr.)]

I find 1968 to be significantly different in flavor from Nottingham.  In side by side fermentations they produce significantly different beers.

I get much more bitterness from 1968 than I do from Nottingham.

So if the Nottingham flavor profile is what you’re looking for, be aware that it will not be the same.

[erockrph]

I don’t know if Danstar has improved their quality control recently, but if I wanted to replicate the experiences I had with Notty I’d just take an English ale strain then skip my normal sanitation procedures. I’ve had fairly disappointing results with it when I’ve used it, with a sour note that has me concerned that there may be some contamination.

[denny]

@erockrph

I don’t know if Danstar has improved their quality control recently, but if I wanted to replicate the experiences I had with Notty I’d just take an English ale strain then skip my normal sanitation procedures. I’ve had fairly disappointing results with it when I’ve used it, with a sour note that has me concerned that there may be some contamination.

I think that’s just the profile of the yeast.  I disliked the tart sourness so much that I stopped using it.

[scarper11 (Pinski)]

@denny

@erockrph

I don’t know if Danstar has improved their quality control recently, but if I wanted to replicate the experiences I had with Notty I’d just take an English ale strain then skip my normal sanitation procedures. I’ve had fairly disappointing results with it when I’ve used it, with a sour note that has me concerned that there may be some contamination.

I think that’s just the profile of the yeast.  I disliked the tart sourness so much that I stopped using it.

This is my recollection as well and another reason I would prefer not to use this yeast.

[jrdunne (Joe Sr.)]

@denny

@erockrph

I don’t know if Danstar has improved their quality control recently, but if I wanted to replicate the experiences I had with Notty I’d just take an English ale strain then skip my normal sanitation procedures. I’ve had fairly disappointing results with it when I’ve used it, with a sour note that has me concerned that there may be some contamination.

I think that’s just the profile of the yeast.  I disliked the tart sourness so much that I stopped using it.

This is my recollection as well and another reason I would prefer not to use this yeast.

No disagreement here.

Strangely, though, I’ve found that the old ale I brewed with it seems to just keep improving and is better than the one with the ESB yeast.  It may be that the strange sourness fits well for an old ale.  Certainly not for a bitter.

[davidgzach]

I think the 1968 makes a great bitter.  My only beef with it is the low attenuation.

Dave