So I'm relatively new to home brew. I've done a Christmas Porter, a raspberry and have a stout in my secondary. I've been pleased with the porter and raspberry. I've done all of these from established recipes. I follow the directions as far as the amount of time they sit in the primary and secondary, but I noticed with the stout that the fermenting seemed to end sooner than the recipe called for. When should I move it over? When the recipe indicates or when the airlock is no longer bubbling?
When to move to secondary
- Thread starter bigadam
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Waynep005
Well-Known Member
You do not really need to move the beer to a secondary unless you are adding something like fruit or wood at that point. Just let it sit in the primary for 2 to three weeks and make sure it has reached final gravity before bottling.
There are lots of threads about this very topic. Many brewers, including myself, don't use a secondary at all, unless they wish to bulk age their beer, or add some sort of adjunct, such as oak chips or fruit.
However, you want to wait until primary fermentation is complete -- when specific gravity remains constant for three days. Some brewers may wish to wait several days after that to allow more yeast to fall out, others might cold crash to accomplish the same thing.
I like to simply wait a week or two after primary fermentation, to allow the yeast to clean up any off-flavors it may have created, then go straight to keg.
However, you want to wait until primary fermentation is complete -- when specific gravity remains constant for three days. Some brewers may wish to wait several days after that to allow more yeast to fall out, others might cold crash to accomplish the same thing.
I like to simply wait a week or two after primary fermentation, to allow the yeast to clean up any off-flavors it may have created, then go straight to keg.
Yes. Like Wayne said.
All brew kits and brew shops lean towards a secondary. They call it secondary fermentation. But is not any type of secondary ferment. Maybe at one time many years ago it was a good thing to do to get beer off the yeast cake for the reason of autolysis.. That is a byproduct of the past. Not many homebrewers transfer their beer to a secondary these days.
Let your brew sit in the fermenter for 3 or 4 weeks. Then wrack to a bottling bucket and pour gently into bottles. Put the bottles in a warm place for 2-3 weeks and then into a fridge for a week and drink. Homebrewers don't have the turnaround time professional breweries do. But a homebrewer is totally capable of make great beer.
All brew kits and brew shops lean towards a secondary. They call it secondary fermentation. But is not any type of secondary ferment. Maybe at one time many years ago it was a good thing to do to get beer off the yeast cake for the reason of autolysis.. That is a byproduct of the past. Not many homebrewers transfer their beer to a secondary these days.
Let your brew sit in the fermenter for 3 or 4 weeks. Then wrack to a bottling bucket and pour gently into bottles. Put the bottles in a warm place for 2-3 weeks and then into a fridge for a week and drink. Homebrewers don't have the turnaround time professional breweries do. But a homebrewer is totally capable of make great beer.
forstmeister
Well-Known Member
Unlike a lot of people on this forum I choose to secondary almost all of my beers. I usually let them sit in primary for 10-14 days then transfer to secondary for at least a week to let the rest of the "stuff" drop out of suspension. I am always surprised at the amount of trub I get even after secondary. I just like to take the extra time to let the beer clean up a bit. If I am in a hurry to keg one then I skip secondary but that's only if I need it for a party or something.
ScotBrew
Well-Known Member
Like it's already been said, you don't have to. But, if like me, you only have a plastic fermenting bucket which doubles as your bottling bucket and a glass carboy for secondary 'fermenting' then I'll be moving mine.
I could always put it in the glass carboy first of all though I guess...
I could always put it in the glass carboy first of all though I guess...
BansheeRider
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 1,505
- Reaction score
- 101
I understand that these days a secondary is not necessary. But why when somebody mentions that they use a secondary for majority of their beers they are instantly frowned upon on this forum? I am a new member on here and this was the first thing I noticed.
Because they lack patience. Clear, good beer vs. speed of bottling/kegging are not always compatible!
GASoline71
Well-Known Member
They aren't frowned on. I've never noticed people being shunned for using a secondary. I occasionally secondary a beer. But that is very few and far between nowadays.
Gary
Gary
I agree with Gasman. It's not frowned upon, just not something many of us feel necessary on a routine basis. Opinions might get high flung on this subject. I think many of us who did secondary and then found out it was not really necessary, mostly hype. Maybe we are a bit touchy about the subject and when a new brewer gets led into believing the only way they can make good beer and starts talking about secondary... It's just an old path to travel and gets old.
Happy brewing to you for sure. You'll find many different avenues to travel in beer making. Ask 10 brewers the same question and don't be surprised with more than one answer.
Happy brewing to you for sure. You'll find many different avenues to travel in beer making. Ask 10 brewers the same question and don't be surprised with more than one answer.
secondary use is one subject where people get a bit TOO high and mighty here!
There are many paths to good beer. There many reasons to use secondary vessels.....there are many reasons not to use them. They CAN both be right....and good beer can be made either way.
Now, as for the OP: If you choose to secondary: it should be done several days after fermentation is complete. Taking gravity readings is the only true way to know fermentation is done (another subject likely to elicit long ranty responses)
There are many paths to good beer. There many reasons to use secondary vessels.....there are many reasons not to use them. They CAN both be right....and good beer can be made either way.
Now, as for the OP: If you choose to secondary: it should be done several days after fermentation is complete. Taking gravity readings is the only true way to know fermentation is done (another subject likely to elicit long ranty responses)
BansheeRider
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 1,505
- Reaction score
- 101
The only reasons I've read so far as to why one shouldn't rack to secondary is because there is a increased risk of contamination and/or oxygenating the beer during transfer. If the brewer is very careful and uses a little common sense then these two threats should not be an issue imo. But hey, I'm new, and maybe I haven't done enough research yet.
kevfar100 said:
After that amount of time you don't even need to secondary, if its been a few days since FG just bottle it. Another thing is your going to have trub coming out of the spigot and into your bottles.
BansheeRider
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 1,505
- Reaction score
- 101
You will have to poor the priming sugar on top of your beer and then stir, which will also move around the trub and get into your bottles.
I've noticed that secondaries are almost a religous topic too. So my best effort at answering the OP question and explaining why at the same time:
Yeast was weak at pitching: Likely secondary (Get off trub)
Dry Hopping/Fruit Addition: Sometimes secondary (Don't scrub aroma)
High ABV: Sometimes secondary (Benifits from aging)
Bulk aging: Usually Secondary (Smoothing, often with dark beers)
Dry Hopping during primary: Usually secondary (Avoid over-hopping flavors)
Need primary fermenter: Must secondary
Anything else: Use judgement between aging/off-flavor risk
(Not all possibilities)
As for when, it doesn't really matter. If the primary is still going yoour contamination and oxidation risk is low so rack to any size vessel (within reason). If you're after primary your oxidation risk is high, so rack to a vessel almost exactly your batch size. Usually around 1-3 months there is no need to rack, either the aging has started or the damage has been done by autolysis.
This is not an end-all be-all, just my obvservations on why this topic is so split.
Yeast was weak at pitching: Likely secondary (Get off trub)
Dry Hopping/Fruit Addition: Sometimes secondary (Don't scrub aroma)
High ABV: Sometimes secondary (Benifits from aging)
Bulk aging: Usually Secondary (Smoothing, often with dark beers)
Dry Hopping during primary: Usually secondary (Avoid over-hopping flavors)
Need primary fermenter: Must secondary
Anything else: Use judgement between aging/off-flavor risk
(Not all possibilities)
As for when, it doesn't really matter. If the primary is still going yoour contamination and oxidation risk is low so rack to any size vessel (within reason). If you're after primary your oxidation risk is high, so rack to a vessel almost exactly your batch size. Usually around 1-3 months there is no need to rack, either the aging has started or the damage has been done by autolysis.
This is not an end-all be-all, just my obvservations on why this topic is so split.
I am a lazy brewer: I go straight from primary to kegs. I put the kegs on CO2 and let them sit for a couple of weeks. First glass pretty much takes care of any trub that settled in the keg.
mammothkraken
Well-Known Member
I secondary on some beers and others not. I recently made a phenomenal pilsner that sat in the same fermentor for 2+ months through primary, diacetyl rest, and lagering. On other batches that need to be dryhopped or have adjuncts added I'll rack to secondary in 7-10 days.
It depends on what you expect the end product to be and what suits your tastes.
There are arguments for both methods. My advice is secondary when you feel like it and don't when you don't but don't get too hung up on either doing it one way it the other.
It depends on what you expect the end product to be and what suits your tastes.
There are arguments for both methods. My advice is secondary when you feel like it and don't when you don't but don't get too hung up on either doing it one way it the other.
I recently racked after 4 days of primary fermentation and let it sit in the carboy for 2 more weeks of secondary fermentation like the kit instructions said and the beer tasted great. The point behind it is to avoid autolysis which is known to produce off flavors. Also a benefit to racking early is that your brew is still producing co2 which helps reduce your risk of oxidation.
Others feel like it is a waste of time or considers it extremely too early to rack. Some think this isn't enough time for the yeast to clean up its byproducts and off flavors. It all comes down to personal preference.
Others feel like it is a waste of time or considers it extremely too early to rack. Some think this isn't enough time for the yeast to clean up its byproducts and off flavors. It all comes down to personal preference.
I don't agree with your method but truly respect your stance.
statu
Well-Known Member
I move most of mine to a secondary for a couple days to remove any sediment that I may have transferred over. There is no need to put it in a secondary. The big brewers don't. It's all about personal preference. The only wrong way is a undrinkable beer. If you get to the drinking stage and are happy then continue on!
Calichusetts
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of "no need" talk on this site about secondaries but if you want to use it go ahead. I do on all my beers. As one of the above posters mentioned, there is no real threat to oxidation or infection if you are careful. I usually wait 3-4 weeks and then cold crash the primary...transfer and dry hop for a week. I sometimes even cold crash the secondary. Hope this helps
LoloMT7
Well-Known Member
I move all my brews to secondary after FG is reached IF I am planning to bottle them. If I'm going to keg then I don't bother (the first and last glasses from the keg get rid of all the sediment anyways). I just don't like to hand out bottles to friends with a bunch of yeast sediment in the bottoms of them (they will pass gas and call you with a stomach ache...lol)
The tours I've been on and seen inside micro breweries they all transfer from the fermentors to "Bright tanks" (kind of like a secondary I believe) That is where they put the beer on CO2 and they age it and allow it to clear. The other thing the big brewers do is filter there beers (most of us homebrews don't as far as I can see)
I think the important thing the secondary users have all said is letting the beer finish up before moving it over. Let the beer finish and if you wanna move it over at that point go for it.
LoloMT7
Well-Known Member
+1 enough time in primary is definitely important. Sanitize good for your transfers and try not to splash in the transfer. Good Luck
GASoline71
Well-Known Member
homebrewdad
Well-Known Member
This is a boogeyman that no longer exists on the typical homebrew scale. Even Palmer has done a complete 180 on this issue.
I have tried both methods, and I personally secondary every beer - I like the security blanket of ensuring less trub in my bottling bucket. For the record, I'm one of those "slow" brewers; I tend to primary for 3-4 weeks, then secondary for anywhere from a week to a few months (for big beers).
Only difficulty with waiting for your brew to completely ferment is that your risk oxidation. Idk what setup he has but I don't use a liter or so of my wort because I don't want the nasty looking trub at the bottom of my cook getting in my primary so my carboy always has a little more open space for oxygen than normal.... racking a tad early (before fermentation is complete) will reduce this risk because your brew will still be producing enough co2 to push all of the oxygen out. It will finish fermentation in the secondary hence "secondary fermentation". My FG was suppose to be 1.010-1.015 and I racked at 1.007...it will develop another small yeast cake in the secondary...but you should of seen all the crap I left behind in the primary! Don't want that in my brew! Haha. Like I said it all depends on who you talk too.
I understand from reading Palmer's book, so many posts, and listening to Palmer's radio talk on this subject, there have been historical problems with long primary fermentations leading to off flavors. And those historical problems were due to the old state-of-the-art in yeast technology. But even in those accounts, primary fermentation time was always recommended to be at least 2 to 3 weeks.
We have advanced yeast technology now, and the professional experts and the experienced brewers realize that much longer fermentation times are very acceptable and advantageous in many cases.
And I understand the technicals, the attenuation phase and the conditioning phase overlap one another - for several weeks. A transfer to secondary before this chemistry occurs will no doubt change the timing of things and the degree/quality of conditioning during the total time.
So the obvious question is "why do the kit instructions have different recommendations on the timing and need for secondary?" One thing is obvious, the quicker you clear your fermentation bucket, the sooner you can load it with the next batch. Aging beer is totally accepted, so a carboy is a good buddy to the fermentation bucket. Business is business and marketing is important.
Secondary is good for all those reasons in the above posts. Secondary is obviously not necessary to make good beers. Secondary is a fun activity and you can look and dream about your accomplishment through the looking glass each day. At this point, I enjoy it.
Secondary is risky unless one is meticulous about sanitation. So for a new brewer, it might not be best to test ones sanitation methods on the first couple of batches. It is not enjoyable to fail in this regard, and the experienced brewers are trying to help us avoid failure in the beginning.
Covered in many threads here, oxidation is not much of a risk if splashing is avoided. The young beer holds C02 and it will out-gas in the carboy pushing the oxygen out the airlock.
I'd bet that after 10 or 20 batches, the fun of using secondary will end. It is quite a bit of work. So many first hand accounts prove that both ways make great homebrew.
Kit instructions, though they contradict the facts, will make good beer. "Time heals uninfected beers." (Revvy's quote modified)
We have advanced yeast technology now, and the professional experts and the experienced brewers realize that much longer fermentation times are very acceptable and advantageous in many cases.
And I understand the technicals, the attenuation phase and the conditioning phase overlap one another - for several weeks. A transfer to secondary before this chemistry occurs will no doubt change the timing of things and the degree/quality of conditioning during the total time.
So the obvious question is "why do the kit instructions have different recommendations on the timing and need for secondary?" One thing is obvious, the quicker you clear your fermentation bucket, the sooner you can load it with the next batch. Aging beer is totally accepted, so a carboy is a good buddy to the fermentation bucket. Business is business and marketing is important.
Secondary is good for all those reasons in the above posts. Secondary is obviously not necessary to make good beers. Secondary is a fun activity and you can look and dream about your accomplishment through the looking glass each day. At this point, I enjoy it.
Secondary is risky unless one is meticulous about sanitation. So for a new brewer, it might not be best to test ones sanitation methods on the first couple of batches. It is not enjoyable to fail in this regard, and the experienced brewers are trying to help us avoid failure in the beginning.
Covered in many threads here, oxidation is not much of a risk if splashing is avoided. The young beer holds C02 and it will out-gas in the carboy pushing the oxygen out the airlock.
I'd bet that after 10 or 20 batches, the fun of using secondary will end. It is quite a bit of work. So many first hand accounts prove that both ways make great homebrew.
Kit instructions, though they contradict the facts, will make good beer. "Time heals uninfected beers." (Revvy's quote modified)
Similar threads
