[sambates]

I have a vial of this on hand, which is "cloned" from the Conan yeast that has been made famous via Heady Topper. I want to go off the grid and make a robust porter with the strain, which is atypical since it's typically used for hop-forward beers.

Has anyone experimented using this yeast in anything other than an APA, IPA, or IIPA? I'd be curious just to see how your brews turned out.

[Fermented-minds]

I have use The Yeast Bay Vermont Ale in a dark beer, but admittedly it was in a cascadian dark ale style beer.

The dark grains in general though went well with the ester profile of the yeast, somewhat surprisingly so.

[blatz]

I have a heady topper clone on tap right now, albeit made with yeast we cultured up from a few cans.

I'd venture to say a porter might even be better than IPA with that yeast...

[Fermented-minds]

I have a heady topper clone on tap right now, albeit made with yeast we cultured up from a few cans.

I'd venture to say a porter might even be better than IPA with that yeast...

I agree. It has a really nice mouthfeel that it leaves even though it attenuates pretty well. Just a great yeast all around!

[HoosierBrew]

Conan is allegedly a strain brought back from England by Greg Noonan, given to John Kimmich of Alchemist. So being a British strain it should work great in porter, stout, or bitter IMO.

[sambates]

Well I'm brewing it up here in a few weeks and I'll report back. I also have some dregs that I made a starter with and will likely ferment 1 gallon of porter on that too. That way I can do a true side by side with the actual conan vs.the cloned conan (ECY29).

[Fermented-minds]

Well I'm brewing it up here in a few weeks and I'll report back. I also have some dregs that I made a starter with and will likely ferment 1 gallon of porter on that too. That way I can do a true side by side with the actual conan vs.the cloned conan (ECY29).

All of the strains on the market now (ECY, The Yeast Bay, etc.) are not "clones". If they were truly isolated from HT, the yeast is the exact same yeast, genetically speaking. Differences in attenuation, flavor profile, etc. that are reported more than likely have a lot to do with how the yeast is propagated, stored, the age of the yeast, the generation, etc. Genetically speaking, they are absolutely identical if HT was the source.

[sambates]

Well I'm brewing it up here in a few weeks and I'll report back. I also have some dregs that I made a starter with and will likely ferment 1 gallon of porter on that too. That way I can do a true side by side with the actual conan vs.the cloned conan (ECY29).

All of the strains on the market now (ECY, The Yeast Bay, etc.) are not "clones". If they were truly isolated from HT, the yeast is the exact same yeast, genetically speaking. Differences in attenuation, flavor profile, etc. that are reported more than likely have a lot to do with how the yeast is propagated, stored, the age of the yeast, the generation, etc. Genetically speaking, they are absolutely identical if HT was the source.

That makes sense. I have read about different attenuations, which like you mentioned is likely from how they do all their business. Well then, can't wait to brew it!

[sambates]

Used this is my robust porter and it added an interesting fruity/citrus character the porter. I can't wait to see how it continues to age, but it turned out well. Glad to have used it outside of a hoppy beer. Saving a washed slurry for a typical batch eventually.

[yso191]

I just brewed a couple of IPAs with GigaYeast's Vermont IPA Yeast GY054.  They both turned out good.  I made a piney IPA and a fruity IPA - I think the yeast favors the fruity style.  It attenuated well, down to 1.007.  I did not like the medium / low flocculation as I am used to Wyeast 1968 for my IPAs.  I didn't find any great unique aspect to this yeast, so I'm going back to 1968.  It was a fun experiment though.

[sambates]

I just brewed a couple of IPAs with GigaYeast's Vermont IPA Yeast GY054.  They both turned out good.  I made a piney IPA and a fruity IPA - I think the yeast favors the fruity style.  It attenuated well, down to 1.007.  I did not like the medium / low flocculation as I am used to Wyeast 1968 for my IPAs.  I didn't find any great unique aspect to this yeast, so I'm going back to 1968.  It was a fun experiment though.

The flocculation was definitely a negative. I agree it's not anything special, I think the hype around Heady Topper and having the Conan strain available made it appealing to homebrewers since cloning HT would be easier than finding HT.

[Philomathica]

All of the strains on the market now (ECY, The Yeast Bay, etc.) are not "clones". If they were truly isolated from HT, the yeast is the exact same yeast, genetically speaking. Differences in attenuation, flavor profile, etc. that are reported more than likely have a lot to do with how the yeast is propagated, stored, the age of the yeast, the generation, etc. Genetically speaking, they are absolutely identical if HT was the source.

The definition of 'clone' is genetically identical.  So, how are the ECY strain, etc not clones.  If they are daughter-descendant cells, then they are clones.