Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Visit The Brewery's sponsor!
Brews & Views Bulletin Board Service * Brews and Views Archive 2004 * April 24, 2004 * Safale S-04 vs Nottingham < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
 

matt_dinges (4.227.154.3)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 12:56 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm doing a spur of the moment brew session this weekend and I have a choice of yeasts: Either Safale S-04 English or Danstar Nottingham.

I've no experience with either. The beer will be roughly a strong pale ale/IPA, generously dosed with a couple of American hops I've not used either(Simcoe & Amarillo). And a couple of malts I haven't used either(Golden Promise & Amber malt).

Any thoughts on the yeasts? Can anybody descrice their characteristics...fermenataion will likely take place in the 66-68*F range, that's where the Tripple is kicking now. I'm leaning towards the Nottingham because it is reputed to be neutral, but I'd like to give the Safale a shot because it has a lot cooler looking package. Is it super "British"?

All input appreciated!
Cheers!

ps...
FWIW, here is the recipe as it stands now:

ProMash Recipe Printout

Recipe : Amber

Recipe Specifics
----------------

Batch Size (GAL): 6.50 Wort Size (GAL): 6.50
Total Grain (LBS): 14.50
Anticipated OG: 1.061 Plato: 15.09
Anticipated SRM: 11.5
Anticipated IBU: 57.8
Brewhouse Efficiency: 75 %
Wort Boil Time: 80 Minutes


Grain/Extract/Sugar

% Amount Name Origin Potential SRM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
69.0 10.00 lbs. Golden Promise Scotland 1.037 2
17.2 2.50 lbs. Munich Malt Belgium 1.038 5
6.9 1.00 lbs. CaraMunich Malt Belgium 1.033 75
3.4 0.50 lbs. Amber Malt Great Britain 1.032 35
3.4 0.50 lbs. Wheat Malt America 1.038 2

Potential represented as SG per pound per gallon.


Hops

Amount Name Form Alpha IBU Boil Time
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.00 oz. Amarillo Whole 7.70 13.4 First WH
0.50 oz. Simcoe Whole 15.30 13.3 First WH
0.50 oz. Simcoe Whole 15.30 24.9 60 min.
0.50 oz. Amarillo Whole 7.70 2.1 1 min.
0.50 oz. Simcoe Whole 15.30 4.2 1 min.
0.50 oz. Amarillo Whole 7.70 0.0 Dry Hop


Yeast
-----

DCL Yeast S-04 SafAle English Ale

Mash Schedule
-------------

Mash Name :
DCL Yeast S-04 SafAle English Ale

Total Grain LBS : 14.50
Grain Temp : 65.00 F
Total Water QTS : 18.00 - Before Additional Infusions
Total Water GAL : 4.50
Tun Thermal Mass : 0.00


Step Rest Start Stop Direct/ Infuse Infuse Infuse
Step Name Time Time Temp Temp Infuse Temp Amount Ratio
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sacc 5 90 151 151 Infuse 164 18.00 1.24


Total Water QTS : 18.00 - After Additional Infusions
Total Water GAL : 4.50 - After Additional Infusions


All temperature measurements are degrees Fahrenheit.
All infusion amounts are in quarts.
 

Fredrik (213.114.44.219)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 01:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I like nottingham alot (haven't tried the other one yet). Great attenuation and very clean. At a little higher temps I found slight pineapples notes that I find very attractive. At 67F you may possibly get some hints of this at most I think. If you get it I would think it's just godness. In my last nottingham beer I got some barely detectable pineapple notes that were great. It was started around 59F which was kept until the fermentation was starting to slow down to about 50% of peak and then let go of cooling to ambient 66F during the finishing.

I usually start cool and during the finish I let go of cooling and let it rise to room temp naturally.

/Fredrik
 

Bret Mayden (66.210.167.16)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 02:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

If you want to the hops to come through (and I am a big fan of Amarillo), Nottingham is the way to go. However, your beer may be fairly dry, as Nott ferments the crap out of damn near anything. Hopefully, the specialty malts in your recipe will keep some body in the brew. As Fred noted, Nott is very clean & does well at lower temps (I have a wheat beer chugging away at 60F). Even at your projected fermentation temps, I don't think esters will be a problem. But unlike Fred, I have never noticed pineapple in any beer I have made with Nottingham. I have used S-04 on one batch, & it performed poorly, with stuck fermentation, so I ended up augmenting with a packet of Nott to get the fermentation going again.
 

Brew Askew (209.12.76.189)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 03:57 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

My experience with S-04 was interesting.
It attenuated well, and was "bready" smelling. Here are the notes from an IPA I brewed last year with it:

Brewed May 3, 2003. Oxygenated with 20 second blast from a "diffusion stone wand".
Glass primary for 15 days. Racked to glass secondary May 18 with cascade pellets.
Condition for two weeks. Fermentation temperatures around 63°F.

Tasting: May 18: Out of primary, it had a strong alcohol kick
and was drier than expected.


The alcohol hotness mellowed and the hops and malt blended well together.

My guess is the pure shot of O2 may have made the difference in the attenuation. I expected some residual sugars. However, it was an illusion. the maltiness and sweetess menerged. BUT, it did go from 1.065 to 1.010 in 14 days.
 

Donald M. Lund (152.163.252.67)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:37 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I've recently made an APA at about 6.8% ABV with S-04, it turned out well, but sure didn't taste like previous APA's made with Nottingham. I tried the S-04 because I was a little unhappy with the way the Nott dried out the beer so much. The S-04 gave the beer a lot more flavor, two people who tried it said it reminded of a wiess, I thought it was very Brit in nature, and wondered if it is appropriate for the style. But appropriate or not, I think it is an improvement over the Nott, I'll be making more of the same.
 

Beerboy (81.134.87.11)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 07:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I hate so-4, 'bready' is a good description. Not what I like in a beer, fruity yes, but not bready.
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 11:40 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Safale -04 is my house ale yeast. It make an ale and ale IMHO and Nottingham makes and ale somewhere between cider and a lager. I really liked edme in the past and since Salale -33 is suppose to be edme, I will split a batch and give it a try. Never stuck, bready aroma during the early stages of fermentation but that goes away with a couple of weeks (usually 2) in the bottle. Maybe going from fermeter to keg doesn't give the bready aroma enough time to mellow?

-Doug
 

Paul Hayslett (64.252.36.141)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 12:25 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I hate Nottingham. "Nott ferments the crap out of damn near anything," is an absolutely perfect description. I keep some around to use a bottling yeast for really big beers after long secondaries and I guess I could see using it in a Berliner, but I hate what it does to most ales. The last time I used it was in a porter with mountains of specialty grains and it still left no body at all.

S-O4 is better but I find the bready aroma distracting. And while I find that it diminishes over time, I can still taste it after months. The sensation really is different than "fruity"; it smells like rising bread dough.

S-33 is better than both. The fruitiness is present but not overpowering and the beer retains a reasonable amount of sugar. Definitely the best of the bunch.
 

Fredrik (62.20.8.114)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 02:04 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

As I like nottinghamn I would like to defend it a bit :)

> Nott ferments the crap out of damn near anything.

The cure for dry beers is to just decrease fermentability in the receipe when using a "dry strain", this is easy. I guess the easiest way if you don't want to change the mashing is to add maltodextrin powder.

Personally I like beers a little bit sweeter than most beer drinking friends. I never had problems with too dry beers with nottingham. I determine the sweetness from the receipe.

It is clear that you have to adjust the receipe if you change the strain. Apart from that I have reasons to believe that to more attenuative strain, the more reproducable FG, and less impact from pitching rates.

Nottingham rules :)

/Fredrik
 

Jim Keaveney (64.12.116.24)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 02:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

i made an irish red ale with S-04. good performance, left some malty character,not real fruity at all, but there was some of that bready quality everyone is talking about (tho not overwhelming)
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 02:32 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Fredrik,
The point is that tried and true recipes tend to be turned into something with less body and flavor with nottingham than with other yeasts. Most of us have settled in on a set of recipes that we like and just tinker with the grain bills and hops in small ways. Try brewing a beer with far less than 40% sugar and then split that batch between Nottingham and either S-04 of S-33. You will see a big difference.

-Doug
 

Steve Ruch (209.240.205.63)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 03:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I brewed an Imperial Stout with the safale-04 and was happy with the results. I entered it in the AHA comp.
I was thinking about using the nottingham on a pale ale soon. I'll have to keep the "ferments the crap out of anyting" in mind and maybe up the mash temp 5 or 6 degrees.
 

chumley (63.227.170.198)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 03:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

For Matt's recipe, I would go for the S-04. If you go for the Nottingham, I would add a half pound of crystal (or another 0.5 lb. of the Caramunich) to keep some residual sweetness.

I'm a big fan of Nottingham for dry, crisp cream ales. For hoppy APAs, you need some malt to balance out the hops, which, I agree with the others, Nottingham would tend to strip out. Another option, if you are using Nottingham, would be to add a half pound or pound of aromatic or honey malt to the grain bill - that works very well with Nottingham.
 

Dane Clark (199.224.124.154)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I just transferred a pale ale to secondary that was fermented with nottingham. It went from 1.061 to 1.007 in seven days and tastes a bit thin and alcoholic.
 

Adam W (128.125.6.113)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yes, in my expert opinion Nottingham does in fact rule!

Nottingham is very good for strong hoppy IPA's.

It will bring down your gravity to reasonable levels, making a very clean tasting beer.

For example, I recently made an IPA with Nott and it had an OG of 1.071 and it finished at 1.012. Tastes great and its less filling!

Lower FG's are a good thing anyway, especially for most of the homebrewers I've seen, who tend to be pretty chunky...

Would I make a mild or a bitter with Nottingham? No, of course not. But it is very good for a highly attenuative yeast.
 

Denny Conn (63.114.138.2)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:21 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

S-04 sucks...
 

Fredrik (213.114.44.219)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

> S-04 sucks...

I can't wait to try it Denny :) My LHBS gave me several free packs for testing. I'm going to try it as soon as I get time.

/Fredrik
 

matt_dinges (4.228.240.70)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 05:03 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Shoot...maybe I should just smack that pack of 1056 and make the starter...I guess I could always save some of the cake...I hate using a yeast only once and this is the last brew session before the middle/end of May, hence the dry yeast usage.

Decisions, Decisions...

Thanks for all the excellent input folks!
Cheers
 

Denny Conn (63.114.138.2)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 05:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Fredrik, it's just my opinion...I don't care at all for the bready, estery quality of it. Others (obviously) love it. Try it and form your own opinion.
 

fob (199.184.119.58)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 05:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Matt,

If you want to use the Nottingham, I'd take Adam's advice and up the og to 1.072 or so. I've gotten between 80-84% attenuation with Nottingham, and thus far, my favorite beer with it was a 1.072 IPA with Yakima Magnums, Fuggles and Amarillos. I haven't noticed the bready flavors others have described with S-04, but I've only made porters with it. My problem with S-04 has been low attenuation. It flocculates so quickly and completely that I think you have to rouse the yeast to get good attenuation with it.
 

Jake Isaacs (160.129.126.219)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 06:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Nottingham is a great yeast, you just have to be prepared for its appetite. I don't have any experience with your base malt, but you might want to nudge up the caramunich or add a dash of carapils (or not, you're probably fine).

The only time I've had a brew turn out WAY too dry with Nottingham was when I tried a 100% pale malt APA as an experiment. Still tasty, but distractingly dry.

I agree with Adam W that this yeast is great for accentuating hops. I'm not a big fan of Cascade in general, but hops that have Cascade in their lineage (as I think Amarillo does?) go great with Nottingham. Santiam might be my favorite there.
 

Wykowski (209.222.26.27)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 06:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

nottingham sucks too !!!

no need to debate...just offering one more opinion
 

Denny Conn (63.114.138.2)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 06:40 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I find Nottingham at least useable if you formulate the recipe properly. S-04 I just don't like the taste of...but it's all personal preference and everybody's entitled to their own!
 

jim williams (68.0.214.107)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 07:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I agree with Denny here. I used safale S04 once and was so impressed with it's performance that I went on a mad brewing spree and brewed 3 times in a week (that's the original, plus 2 more). the beers have all aged sufficiently now, and I hate all of them! They all have a very distinct flavor that I just do not like. Bready? Not sure about that, and that's coming from a baker (!), but, there is definitely a flavor that lingers, I hate. Beautiful aroma, though, then the taste! I've got 20 gal. taking up space in my chest freezer hoping they'll mellow to the point where I can drink them. I'll never use S04 again! Oh, and Denny, I'm really bumbed, because one of them is 10 gallons of your Rye IPA. I'll definitely have to brew that one again with a different yeast.
Jim
 

Drew Avis (209.226.137.106)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 07:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I think next to Ringwood, there isn't a yeast out there as "controversial" as S04. Personally, I love it - but I like Ringwood too. I don't find it "bready" but rather "minerally," sometimes with a sharp, iron-bite. Hard to describe really, but it's not boring. But you either love it or hate it. The best you can say for Nottingham is that its "predictable" i.e. boring. I tried 6 different beers at a Nottingham brewpub in Montreal a few weeks ago, and didn't care for any of them.

I believe S04 is far more dependant on water profile and ferm temp than Nottingham. My suspicion is that it shows more "character" at higher temps and in harder water. Just a suspicion, I haven't really investigated.
 

Josh Weber (199.35.157.100)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 07:51 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Matt, I think you'll be fine with either one. They both work well. I worried about S04 being "too british" as well, but I haven't found that to be the case when making a highly hopped brew.
 

Paul Hayslett (64.252.36.141)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 07:59 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

> My suspicion is that it shows more
> "character" at higher temps and in harder water.

Interesting thought. My water is *extremely* soft. If your water is hard, that might explain the difference between my "bready" flavors and your "iron bite" flavors.
 

aleman (66.163.145.41)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 09:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Reno Nevada Pale Ale

A ProMash Recipe Report

BJCP Style and Style Guidelines
-------------------------------

05-A English-style Pale Ale, Classic English Pale Ale

Min OG: 1.044 Max OG: 1.056
Min IBU: 20 Max IBU: 40
Min Clr: 4 Max Clr: 11 Color in SRM, Lovibond

Recipe Specifics
----------------

Batch Size (Gal): 10.50 Wort Size (Gal): 10.50
Total Grain (Lbs): 23.50
Anticipated OG: 1.056 Plato: 13.8
Anticipated SRM: 7.4
Anticipated IBU: 32.0
Brewhouse Efficiency: 70 %
Wort Boil Time: 60 Minutes


Grain/Extract/Sugar

% Amount Name Origin Potential SRM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
76.6 18.00 lbs. Pale Malt(2-row) America 1.036 2
8.5 2.00 lbs. Caramel Pils Malt Belgium 1.034 2
4.3 1.00 lbs. Corn Grits 1.040 1
4.3 1.00 lbs. Flaked Barley America 1.032 2
4.3 1.00 lbs. Munich Malt(dark) Canada 1.034 30
2.1 0.50 lbs. Crystal 80L 1.033 80

Potential represented as SG per pound per gallon.


Hops

Amount Name Form Alpha IBU Boil Time
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.00 oz. Liberty Whole 5.00 10.4 60 min.
1.00 oz. Styrian Goldings Pellet 5.25 6.7 30 min.
1.00 oz. Santium Whole 7.60 8.0 30 min.
2.00 oz. Willamette Whole 5.00 7.0 20 min.


Yeast
-----

DCL Yeast SO4 Safale


Mash Schedule
-------------

Mash Name: Single infusion

Total Grain Lbs: 23.50
Total Water Qts: 27.00 - Before Additional Infusions
Total Water Gal: 6.75 - Before Additional Infusions

Tun Thermal Mass: 0.00
Grain Temp: 68.00 F


Step Rest Start Stop Heat Infuse Infuse Infuse
Step Name Time Time Temp Temp Type Temp Amount Ratio
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saccarification 5 90 156 156 Infuse 171 27.00 1.15
mash out 5 30 167 167 Infuse 210 8.11 1.49


I love this beer. I am tired of people demanding that yeasts be CLEAN flavored. I like yeast character. SAFALE requires a month of cold conditioning. As my friend Nathi says Nottingham tears a beer apart. Safale flocs very well. The beer you make with it often looks filtered. Its not perfect, but hey I am going to use it on my dirty English Pale Ales.....
 

matt_dinges (4.228.6.13)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 09:40 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Thanks again folks...
I'm certainly not afraid of an "unclean" yeast...I brew Belgian beers almost exclusively. But on a hoppy brew(especially flavor and aroma) you need to be careful about what the yeast will contribute...I've dumped more than one recklessly hopped brew fermented with Belgian yeast strains, and I don't want the yeast to throw-off the lovely hop aroma one bit on this beer.

I'm certainly not gung-ho on using either of these dry yeasts, so I think I'll just make the 1056 starter...and save the others for??? yeast nutrient maybe?

Cheers
 

Pete Strunk (4.239.120.24)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 11:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I tried them both and I find Nottingham sometimes is a slow starter and never violent for me. I had mixed results with it. S-04 however,well I only used 3 times cause this thread has been here before with the same results and opinon's and led me to try it. S-04 for me was a great starter, in fact all 3 of my beers started within two hours after pitching. I didn't notice bready flavors from it. The beers were in the 1.050 range. Cascade pale ale,English bitter and an American nut brown all with great results. Even my Bud swill drinking buddies liked them all,go figure. Just my two cents! Opinons are like assholes; everyone has one. BREW ON--DRINK UP!!!
 

Pacman (68.51.78.225)
Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 11:59 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)


Quote:

By Denny Conn (63.114.138.2) on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 04:21 pm: Edit

S-04 sucks...




How do you really feel about this yeast Denny... hahahahhaaahahha...

I just used this yeast for the first time. I made a RIS just over a month ago... It took it from 1.096 to 1.035 in a week... I fermented a bit warm (doh!!) so it has some fruity esters to it and I also hopped the "F" out of it so I may never really get a good feel for this yeast... I'm definitely gonna be looking for some of the off-flavors mentioned here now though.....



Quote:

By Wykowski (209.222.26.27) on Tuesday, April 13, 2004 - 06:36 pm: Edit

nottingham sucks too !!!

no need to debate...just offering one more opinion




Hahaha.. Let's just say this again... Nottingham sucks...
 

Pacman (68.51.78.225)
Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 12:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Probably a good idea Matt.... I am pretty sure that the RIS was the last time i'll ever use dry yeast again... other than wine yeast for meads..... Liquid is the way to go....
 

Steven Edward Haun (24.220.147.249)
Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 01:19 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Anybody use S-04 in the B-52? Reportedly it is the old Whitbread strain.
 

Randy McCord (216.174.177.182)
Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 02:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

All I can say to you who hate Nottingham so much is: You're using it in the wrong recipe! Anyway, I like both so-4 and nottingham, but with the right ingredients the nottingham will dry the heck out of it. I like fairly sweet beers and I make them, sometimes even with nottingham! Yeast can be a very big part of a beer recipe so you have to plan accordingly. Anyone who says that nottingham sucks is wrong, you can make great beer with it. Mash temp and malt are everything when using it, so if you dont like it, you're a snob.:)
 

Pacman (68.51.78.225)
Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 02:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)


Quote:

All I can say to you who hate Nottingham so much is: You're using it in the wrong recipe!




Nope, it just sucks....



Quote:

Yeast can be a very big part of a beer recipe so you have to plan accordingly.




That's exactly why I plan accordingly and use liquid yeast.. Plan ahead and make a starter and you are good to go...
 

Chris Vejnovich (207.94.179.67)
Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 09:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I had an IPA fermented with S-O4 that was very good indeed. That being said. I usually use the yeast as bottle conditioning yeast. I've used Nottingham with bad results. It tore the beer and left no flavor what so ever. I will admit that I really enjoy British flavors in my beers and I brew mostly Brit beers. I also enjoy lots of body and interesting flavors.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.