Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Conan from BSI

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    30

    Conan from BSI

    I'm just curious if anyone on here has used the Conan strain from BSI? I just brewed my first batch with it last week and am already incredibly happy with it. Prior to this, on my pilot system, I had used ECY29 and Vermont Ale (from YeastBay) and was happy with both. My plan was to use the YeastBay strain but once I spoke to BSI they said they have Conan and have been given permission to sell it (but don't list it and wouldn't release specifics on it). On my first pitch of it I'm at about 83% AA which is very much in line with what Conan is reported to be. The 1st pitches from ECY and YeastBay didn't achieve attenuation this high, even on the same beers, so I'm optimistic.

    Just wanted to see if anyone else was using it. The peach/apricot notes that this strain contributes are wonderful.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Houston, TX, USA
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by FiveMile View Post
    I'm just curious if anyone on here has used the Conan strain from BSI? I just brewed my first batch with it last week and am already incredibly happy with it. Prior to this, on my pilot system, I had used ECY29 and Vermont Ale (from YeastBay) and was happy with both. My plan was to use the YeastBay strain but once I spoke to BSI they said they have Conan and have been given permission to sell it (but don't list it and wouldn't release specifics on it). On my first pitch of it I'm at about 83% AA which is very much in line with what Conan is reported to be. The 1st pitches from ECY and YeastBay didn't achieve attenuation this high, even on the same beers, so I'm optimistic.

    Just wanted to see if anyone else was using it. The peach/apricot notes that this strain contributes are wonderful.
    I've used "Barbarian" a few times and have really liked the results. First brew was with some very citrus/tropical fruit hops, and once it finished fermented, the yeast contributed quite a bit more to the aroma. Since then, I've used less of the hard to get hops, i.e. amarillo, citra, galaxy, etc...since I get those desired aromas from the yeast itself.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bainbridge Island, WA
    Posts
    758
    Used the Yeastbay version on a couple things recently: a pale, a IIPA, a IIIPA.

    Hazy, unflocculent, fussy, apricot bomb. Now everyone thinks that our pale ale is supposed to be like Dogfish's Aprihop. Good attenuation on the pale, difficult harvest, poorer attenuation on the IIPA, even worse on the IIIPA. Had to hit that one with some US-05.

    Don't see the allure, we're not using it again.
    Last edited by Bainbridge; 02-27-2015 at 08:28 AM.
    Russell Everett
    Co-Founder / Head Brewer
    Bainbridge Island Brewing
    Bainbridge Island, WA

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    112
    While we are using Conan, ours is from a new local startup - RVA yeast labs. I'm on gen2 now and even the first pitch took my house ipa down to where Chico generally would, so no issues there. I'm waiting till this beer, and a few more with it, are carbed and cold before I make the call on it. We are on the hunt for a house ale strain, and just prior to this we tried wlp007 - also hugely impressed with that strain as well.

    Same experience on the harvesting with our version of Conan.. Seems to be pretty thin slurry and not a ton of it either, unlike wlp007 which drops out to 50% solids like a rock every time.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Olympia
    Posts
    52
    We trialed four yeast strains, including "Conan" before going with BSI-A69/Wyeast 1469, the Timothy Taylor strain. The Conan strain would not fall out, would not fine out either. Tasted good, though had a low level of dialectal that never reduced. I split a single wort four ways and all four carboys were fermented same temp, o2, etc... I'm only guessing, but it may be that some of these "Conan" and "Vermont Ale" strains are simply harvested from a can of Topper then selected and propagated. This may work with some strains but does not seem to do the trick with the Alchemist strain. Has any one done a side by side with Wyeast 1318 London Ale III and one of the Vermont Ale strains? Supposed to be the same.
    First time, Long time.
    Matchless Brewing
    Three Magnets Brewing
    Olympia WA

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by patbrewer View Post
    We trialed four yeast strains, including "Conan" before going with BSI-A69/Wyeast 1469, the Timothy Taylor strain. The Conan strain would not fall out, would not fine out either. Tasted good, though had a low level of dialectal that never reduced. I split a single wort four ways and all four carboys were fermented same temp, o2, etc... I'm only guessing, but it may be that some of these "Conan" and "Vermont Ale" strains are simply harvested from a can of Topper then selected and propagated. This may work with some strains but does not seem to do the trick with the Alchemist strain. Has any one done a side by side with Wyeast 1318 London Ale III and one of the Vermont Ale strains? Supposed to be the same.
    1318 was also nearly a winner for house ale for us too. I went through a few pitches and several generations with that strain. They are somewhat the same except that Conan seems to be a bit more expressive and full on peach/apricot and lacks that sometimes odd soft/sweet type character that 1318 exhibits even when the beer on paper is at 2.3P finished. I've also noticed that Conan tends to generally drop finished beer ph a tad lower than when I fermented the same recipe with 1318, which makes the Conan fermented stuff seem crisper.

    All that said, I do wonder that back when Greg Noonan brought back Conan back in 1988 - if it was 1318 (the boddingtons strain apparently). Also, I agree that most of the commercial Conan variants are likely cultured from a can of heady, which would also make it tough to know which generation of Conan you get from the various suppliers.

    Either way, I'm making the call between wlp007 and Conan here soon.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    90

    What did you go with?

    Quote Originally Posted by woohokie View Post
    1318 was also nearly a winner for house ale for us too. I went through a few pitches and several generations with that strain. They are somewhat the same except that Conan seems to be a bit more expressive and full on peach/apricot and lacks that sometimes odd soft/sweet type character that 1318 exhibits even when the beer on paper is at 2.3P finished. I've also noticed that Conan tends to generally drop finished beer ph a tad lower than when I fermented the same recipe with 1318, which makes the Conan fermented stuff seem crisper.

    All that said, I do wonder that back when Greg Noonan brought back Conan back in 1988 - if it was 1318 (the boddingtons strain apparently). Also, I agree that most of the commercial Conan variants are likely cultured from a can of heady, which would also make it tough to know which generation of Conan you get from the various suppliers.

    Either way, I'm making the call between wlp007 and Conan here soon.
    Do you mind updating on what you went with and why? Pitch rates and temp?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •