I had some Conan yeast I harvested from a starter that was in the fridge for 9 months. I made a starter, then a 1 gal batch and then used the slurry in the HT clone recipe on here and it came out great. And 81% attenuation.
Yeah, but their new packaging was supposed to be released back in October of last year. Maybe they'll have the new packaging and conan release coincide - that'd be nice!
Edit:
Experimental Ale WLP095 was the strain indicated to be Conan. And I sampled it against WLP001 (not WLP090 as I said previously).
And, from the looks of it, all white labs has been focusing on with this strain is porters and browns. Maybe they're on to something
Is the consensus still to ferment at 60-63? I've got a starter going now of the oly-052. Omegas website says 65-72F...
I am now drinking an IPA done with the Gigayeast version...fermented between 65 -68 for the first week, then allowed to rise to room temp to finisn up...it turned out great.
I would use the same temps again.
Poor Yeast Bay, but it's perfect irony!! Was hunting for conan and was able to order White Labs 095 Burlington yeast through my lhbs. Any reviews on how WL095 compares to Yeast Bay, Omega, Giga, etc?Right. I can't imagine there isn't some kind of agreement in place that protects TYB's strains. But who knows.
Poor Yeast Bay, but it's perfect irony!! Was hunting for conan and was able to order White Labs 095 Burlington yeast through my lhbs. Any reviews on how WL095 compares to Yeast Bay, Omega, Giga, etc?
From the WL description of 095, I don't think that it's Conan. 1) The Alchemist is not in Burlington. 2) I can't imagine the agreement between TYB and WL would allow WL to directly compete with the same strain.
My best guess is that 095 is the Magic Hat strain. When I mentioned to an industry-savvy person that I thought it was probably the Magic Hat strain he said "I think their strain produces a lot of diacetyl." That's remarkable to me because he hadn't read the description of 095, which specifically mentions that it is prone to diacetyl production. I am not aware of Conan being a big diacetyl producer.
Poor Yeast Bay, but it's perfect irony!! Was hunting for conan and was able to order White Labs 095 Burlington yeast through my lhbs. Any reviews on how WL095 compares to Yeast Bay, Omega, Giga, etc?
Given the description, I can't imagine WLP095 is Conan. Without getting into specifics, no, White Labs will not sell my strains under their WLP label, we will always use a co-branded label for my products with The Yeast Bay logo on the label front face with a "produced by" section for the White Labs information. But that is limited to the specific cell lines I bank with them for The Yeast Bay (i.e. cell stocks I send them). They are of course free to isolate, characterize and sell anything they want from any source under their label.
I have a healthy Vermont Ale (Yeast Bay) yeast cake from a recent Heady Topper batch.
Looking for feedback on brewing a Pliny clone w/the Vermont Ale yeast vs. the standard strain of Chico/WLP001.
I had a porter made with conan at White Labs over the holidays. Very tasty and distinctly different than the other version with san diego super yeast. It was displayed as using a white labs experimental ale yeast. I talked with the server about the yeast and he said, "Have you heard of Heady Topper?" (yes) "This [experimental ale yeast] is conan yeast. They've told me that I can tell people since it WILL eventually be released." The conan porter definitely had a big fruity aspect to it that was not found in the 090 version, and it was extremely muddy looking as compared to the 090 verison.
in case anybody missed that - great news!
Yeah, but their new packaging was supposed to be released back in October of last year. Maybe they'll have the new packaging and conan release coincide - that'd be nice!
Edit:
Experimental Ale WLP095 was the strain indicated to be Conan. And I sampled it against WLP001 (not WLP090 as I said previously).
And, from the looks of it, all white labs has been focusing on with this strain is porters and browns. Maybe they're on to something
I can't see WL releasing a Conan strain when they currently produce it for The Yeast Bay.
TYB purchases white labs services to bank and propagate yeast as needed for the strains that TYB banks with them. That's all on TYB what they choose culture, where they get their cultures, what they bank, and what they pay to store/propagate.
Just because I manufacture TVs for Sanyo doesn't mean it precludes me from making and selling my own TVs to the public - unless, of course, there is a no-competition contract I signed.
Right. I can't imagine there isn't some kind of agreement in place that protects TYB's strains. But who knows.
word on the street is that this isn't conan. diacetyl has never been a problem with conan.Well, there you go. It took almost two years but it has finally been released:
https://www.whitelabs.com/yeast/wlp095-burlington-ale-yeast
word on the street is that this isn't conan. diacetyl has never been a problem with conan.
it's probably magic hat's yeast.
word on the street is that this isn't conan. diacetyl has never been a problem with conan.
it's probably magic hat's yeast.
Could be why temp range is so small (67-70)? Fwiw I just used omega Conan & it flocc'd crystal clear.Edit: In regards to diacetyl, when has that ever been a lingering issue for an ale fermented in the upper 60s? All yeast strains produce it, but it blows and cleans shortly following completion of fermentation, particularly with lower floccing strains (WLP095 is only a med floccer).
Could be why temp range is so small (67-70)? Fwiw I just used omega Conan & it flocc'd crystal clear.
Hmmm... I wonder if White Labs would be willing to clear this up for us or if they prefer to be tight-lipped about it.
Hi- Customer service has forwarded me your question. In regards to
the origin of our yeast strains, we don't release that but the WLP095
Burlington Ale Yeast is the best choice for trying to make a Heady Topper
clone. Hope that helps!
I contacted White Labs about the origins of WLP095 being 'Conan'. I mentioned Vermont Pub and Brewery and The Alchemist in my email, but never referenced any specific beer. The reply was from the lab manager (with permission to repost) and was very true-to-form for "White Labs" (which I can appreciate):
No further ahead or behind than a minute ago, but we can certainly speculate
Hmm...yeah certainly makes it sound like Conan. But then why would they call it Burlington? Plus, I can definitely see it making sense that they would want us homebrewers spreading the rumor/truth that it is this popular and sought after yeast
OT: I just kegged a gin-barrel aged rye saison that @m00ps would probably find some appreciation for. A smidge too barrel characterful but quite good nonetheless.
you dont know me!
But then why would they call it Burlington?
slight aside, but i've now user conan 3 times, from different yeast vendors, and it has under-attenuated for me each time. i believe the issue is that the yeast doesn't do well in its first generation. my working assumption is that the yeast needs hops and stress to toughen up. if/when i use conan again, i'm going to make a high-gravity starter (1.060?) that is hopped to 50-60 IBUs.My experience with the East Coast Yeast version has not been good (significant under-attenuation).
slight aside, but i've now user conan 3 times, from different yeast vendors, and it has under-attenuated for me each time. i believe the issue is that the yeast doesn't do well in its first generation. my working assumption is that the yeast needs hops and stress to toughen up. if/when i use conan again, i'm going to make a high-gravity starter (1.060?) that is hopped to 50-60 IBUs.
my working assumption is that the yeast needs hops and stress to toughen up. if/when i use conan again, i'm going to make a high-gravity starter (1.060?) that is hopped to 50-60 IBUs.
Enter your email address to join: