# Nottingham Yeast And Three Shades Of Stout



## beerdrinkingbob (21/9/10)

Hi Guys,

I was thinking of brewing Three shades stout this week (first stout) and was reading the notes in the recipedb, he said that euro style yeast was working out better than US05. 

Just wondering if Nottingham could be the go? I really don't want to use liquid yeast just yet :unsure: 

Any help will be great appreciated :icon_cheers: 

BDB


----------



## drsmurto (21/9/10)

Nottingham would be fine


----------



## bconnery (21/9/10)

beerdrinkingbob said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I was thinking of brewing Three shades stout this week (first stout) and was reading the notes in the recipedb, he said that euro style yeast was working out better than US05.
> 
> ...


I haven't brewed that particular recipe but Nottingham is a good dry yeast for dark ales and stouts generally.


----------



## Lord Raja Goomba I (21/9/10)

I like nottingham, though you need (with a stout) to mash higher if you don't want Notts to eat it all up and end up with a thinner body. I personally like my stouts with a thicker mouth feel.

The other dry yeast that is really good is Windsor yeast. I used it for my last dark ale and the beer was fantastic (in fact everyone drunk it on me and I hardly ended up with any of it).

Goomba


----------



## big78sam (21/9/10)

Lord Raja Goomba I said:


> I like nottingham, though you need (with a stout) to mash higher if you don't want Notts to eat it all up and end up with a thinner body. I personally like my stouts with a thicker mouth feel.



+1 to this. I bottled a 3 shades with Nottingham about 3 weeks ago and at an early stage it is a bit too dry for my tastes (I know it's meant to be a dry stout but there are varying degrees of dry). If I had my time again I'd mash a couple of degrees higher to get a but more non-fermentable sugar in the wort. 

FWIW, I've also done a 3 shades with 1187 but didn't do a proper diacetyl rest and it was too butterscotchy to give a proper comparison. I used Nottingham this time as it's just so easy.


----------



## Dazza_devil (21/9/10)

beerdrinkingbob said:


> Just wondering if Nottingham could be the go? I really don't want to use liquid yeast just yet :unsure:
> 
> 
> 
> BDB



Go on, what's stopping you?

It's easier and cheaper than dried yeast if you do it right.

1084 would be well worth the investment for this one I reckon.


----------



## Lord Raja Goomba I (21/9/10)

Boagsy said:


> Go on, what's stopping you?
> 
> It's easier and cheaper than dried yeast if you do it right.
> 
> 1084 would be well worth the investment for this one I reckon.



Boagsy - that being the case, could you do a "how to make yeast" type guide - I've seen nothing I can use in the wiki that is a simple "buy this wet yeast, do this and you'll have lots of slants" in normal speak.



big78sam said:


> +1 to this. I bottled a 3 shades with Nottingham about 3 weeks ago and at an early stage it is a bit too dry for my tastes (I know it's meant to be a dry stout but there are varying degrees of dry). If I had my time again I'd mash a couple of degrees higher to get a but more non-fermentable sugar in the wort.



Do a diacetyl rest with Windsor, plus it flocculates poorly.

Notts dries anything out. I love it for lighter and medium colour beers where I want that (such as APA), but for Darks where I want it not too dry, Windsor all the way.

Goomba


----------



## Swinging Beef (21/9/10)

Danstar Nottingham is awesome yeast for 'northern' ale, but Danstar's London yeast would probably be a better choice for stouts and porter.


----------



## white.grant (21/9/10)

I am a big fan of nottingham, use it frequently on my dark milds and get a nice malty/estery mid strength ale. Comparable to the flavours I get out of liquid 1968 and 1028 (ESB and London Ale respectively).


cheers

grant


----------



## bconnery (21/9/10)

Lord Raja Goomba I said:


> Boagsy - that being the case, could you do a "how to make yeast" type guide - I've seen nothing I can use in the wiki that is a simple "buy this wet yeast, do this and you'll have lots of slants" in normal speak.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny how tastes are different. 
I don't like Nottingham in lighter beers and particularly hoppier beers. I find it strips hop flavour a lot. 
I love Windosr, and would use it in a dark beer, but I think Nottingham is at its best in a dark beer. 

Anyway, on the liquid yeast off topic, they don't have to be complicated with slants and splitting, that's mostly a cost saving thing. 
I am lazy with this sort of thing, but still need to save money, so I go the re-using the yeast cake method. 
Ideally you should make a starter with liquid yeast, but for reasonably fresh yeast in an ale of moderate strength, up to about 1.060 tops starting gravity, that isn't necessary. Best practice yes, but for dipping your toe into liquid yeast, (figuratively of course ...) it's fine. 
I use dry yeast a lot, I think it makes great beer, but like the variety of liquids.

I simply smack the pack a few days before brewday, pitch directly into the cooled wort. 
Then, next week, or two weeks, when brewing again, I rack the beer off the yeast cake and generally scoop some into my next beer with a sanitised container. 

I aim for two beers minimum this way, which makes it around $5 a yeast at a minimum. Yes that is relatively expensive but it's only a few dollars more than a pack of dry yeast. 
Plus in means you have to brew more close together, to 'save money'  

You can also store some of this yeast cake in a sanitised container for a short period. have a read on re-using yeast cake and you'll find various methods people use to do this.


----------



## Lord Raja Goomba I (21/9/10)

big78sam said:


> +1 to this. I bottled a 3 shades with Nottingham about 3 weeks ago and at an early stage it is a bit too dry for my tastes (I know it's meant to be a dry stout but there are varying degrees of dry). If I had my time again I'd mash a couple of degrees higher to get a but more non-fermentable sugar in the wort.
> 
> FWIW, I've also done a 3 shades with 1187 but didn't do a proper diacetyl rest and it was too butterscotchy to give a proper comparison. I used Nottingham this time as it's just so easy.






Swinging Beef said:


> Danstar Nottingham is awesome yeast for 'northern' ale, but Danstar's London yeast would probably be a better choice for stouts and porter.



when I bought the windsor dry yeast (another Danstar product), I couldn't get the london as it was out of stock, so windsor was the next.

I ended up doing a dark ale at about 4%, which was thick, smooth and dessert-like - they were the words used by the people who drank (all of) it.

But again, if you don't want the Notts to eat it all, mash high. I've mashed at 74 degrees to keep body up, alcohol down.



bconnery said:


> Funny how tastes are different.
> I don't like Nottingham in lighter beers and particularly hoppier beers. I find it strips hop flavour a lot.



Funny it is. Actually all the beers I've used it with are hoppy beers - I've been using strong, dominant, flavoursome hops (like Nelson Sauvin and Citra) and ended up with flavoursome beers, but not that same level of bitterness (though my problem with less than perfect carbonation might reduce bitterness perception) of even a lower AA% hop beer.

The other reason I do like it, is that you can do a beer real quick - even in (Qld) winter (we don't get winter, it just isn't hot), I'll have a batch to FG in 5 or 6 days max - it seems to be tolerant of a wide range of temps too. Supplies got low after the dark ale (and the brown ale), so I had to (and still have to) start production.

I'm tempted to use the cake I get from a notts based beer and chuck it in another beer.

Goomba


----------



## big78sam (21/9/10)

Me thinks a side by side might be in order - a big batch split 3 ways, one fermented with Nottingham, one windsor and one Wyeast 1187. Something to add to the to-do list...


----------



## bconnery (21/9/10)

big78sam said:


> Me thinks a side by side might be in order - a big batch split 3 ways, one fermented with Nottingham, one windsor and one Wyeast 1187. Something to add to the to-do list...


One of the reasons I hold this belief about Nottingham, although I already felt that way, was our club did a big side by side test. We took a wort from a commercial brew day and all added a different yeast. No other additions, just yeast and fermentation temps as the variables. 
The wort was a best bitter, although issues on the brewday meant the strength was closer to the standard bitter range. 

One that stood out in particular was Nottingham vs S04, which had been placed next to each other on the serving table. The nottingham beer was way dryer and had also lost a lot of hop flavour particularly in comparison. 
The 1187 beer was one of the best of the night. 

I still like Nottingham for a porter or stout, but for anything hop driven I find it hard to go past US05.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (21/9/10)

WOW thanks for all the advise guys, muchly appreciated.

I'm still tossing up if i will go with the Irish ale or the Nottingham but at least i know the pro's and con's. B) 

Just found out my LHBS doesn't have target and I think I've made the decision to go about 70 grams of EK Golding's at 60 and 30 at 15 minutes making the IBU's about 37.6. 

It's a bit lower than the original recipe but i would have to re mortgage the house to make up the other 7.5 IBU's :blink:


----------



## Dazza_devil (21/9/10)

Lord Raja Goomba I said:


> Boagsy - that being the case, could you do a "how to make yeast" type guide - I've seen nothing I can use in the wiki that is a simple "buy this wet yeast, do this and you'll have lots of slants" in normal speak.




I don't do slants but a layman's wiki would be good for those contemplating it.
As bconnery posted it doesn't need to be complicated at all.
I found enough information off AHB to be able to save some samples from a starter made from a smack-pack, sounds easy and it is.
You wont look back, there's a whole world of variety out there waitin, choose what you want and build a stock in your beer fridge to select from each time you brew.


----------



## drsmurto (22/9/10)

beerdrinkingbob said:


> WOW thanks for all the advise guys, muchly appreciated.
> 
> I'm still tossing up if i will go with the Irish ale or the Nottingham but at least i know the pro's and con's. B)
> 
> ...



You dont need any flavour or aroma additions in this beer.

I make this recipe up a lot, i have a version on tap at the moment. I only add a 60 min addition, this beer is all about malt, roast, choc, coffee goodness. I normally up the OG to 1.050 and bump the IBU to 40-45.

Nottingham will work fine in this beer, i personally use Wy1187 (ringwood) or WY1469 (west yorky), the latter is what i used on the current batch.


----------



## Supra-Jim (22/9/10)

Boagsy said:


> I don't do slants but a layman's wiki would be good for those contemplating it.
> As bconnery posted it doesn't need to be complicated at all.
> I found enough information off AHB to be able to save some samples from a starter made from a smack-pack, sounds easy and it is.
> You wont look back, there's a whole world of variety out there waitin, choose what you want and build a stock in your beer fridge to select from each time you brew.



Got a feeling Wolfy knocked out a pretty nice little thread (with pics)

Here's the link: http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/inde...mp;#entry668236

I believe he also has thread on going from slants to a starter

Cheers SJ


----------



## MaltyHops (22/9/10)

Supra-Jim said:


> Boagsy said:
> 
> 
> > I don't do slants but a layman's wiki would be good for those contemplating it.
> ...


Yes, Wolfy has done a super job with putting together a set of pictorial guides
covering making slants and how to use them - I've linked to the threads near
the bottom of this article New brewer questions - Preparation.

I can understand the instructions look really complicated requiring lots of specialised
gear but if you have an equipped kitchen it's easy enough to assemble a collection of
items that will serve the same purposes - eg. use a cleaned/sterilised big jar instead of
the conical erlenmeyer flask, pulled straight paperclip instead of the inoculation loop,
etc. About the only thing unusual that really needs to be bought are the test tubes 
and even then you could probably figure out a substitute.


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (22/9/10)

DrSmurto said:


> You dont need any flavour or aroma additions in this beer.
> 
> I make this recipe up a lot, i have a version on tap at the moment. I only add a 60 min addition, this beer is all about malt, roast, choc, coffee goodness. I normally up the OG to 1.050 and bump the IBU to 40-45.
> 
> Nottingham will work fine in this beer, i personally use Wy1187 (ringwood) or WY1469 (west yorky), the latter is what i used on the current batch.




Thanks DrSmurto, So do you think EKG are ok used a bittering option minus the 15 addition or would somthing like POR be better


----------



## drsmurto (22/9/10)

beerdrinkingbob said:


> Thanks DrSmurto, So do you think EKG are ok used a bittering option minus the 15 addition or would somthing like POR be better



EKG would be fine, i would personally use a higher AA% hop like Target or Challenger but I have used EKG to bitter with and have no problems with it.


----------



## big78sam (22/9/10)

DrSmurto said:


> EKG would be fine, i would personally use a higher AA% hop like Target or Challenger but I have used EKG to bitter with and have no problems with it.



FWIW, IIRC, LCPA uses EKG for bittering so if it works for them it should for us homebrewers

Like Smurto I generally use a higher AA% hop for bittering as it's cheaper!


----------



## Dazza_devil (22/9/10)

Just looking through a few bittering hops for this one,

Challenger would be my first choice

Others I would consider just to try them out, 

Admiral
Northdown
Pilgrim

something to think about anyway.


----------



## Lord Raja Goomba I (22/9/10)

For bittering cheaply:

Amarillo
Simcoe
Citra
Nelson Sauvin

I can up to 40IBU with the last 2, not as high in "nasty" bitterness and still have a bit leftover for either aroma or for another brew.


----------



## juzz1981 (22/9/10)

DrSmurto said:


> EKG would be fine, i would personally use a higher AA% hop like Target or Challenger but I have used EKG to bitter with and have no problems with it.



I made this stout with a single 60min addition of EKG and used nottingham yeast ... tastes good to me


----------



## beerdrinkingbob (22/9/10)

Boagsy said:


> Just looking through a few bittering hops for this one,
> 
> Challenger would be my first choice
> 
> ...




Well i will let you know, in a last moment of crazy and lack of hops at the LHBS i went with pilgrim to bitter, saved some Arthur ash and I'm sure it will still taste good. :icon_drunk:


----------

