Is patience really a virtue?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

gr8shandini

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
799
Reaction score
57
Location
Philly
Although I've been brewing for close to 5 years now, I like to read through the beginners forum in the hopes that I can give something back to the HBT community which has helped me out greatly over much of that time. However, I think there is a cadre of very vocal members who are giving misleading advice regarding the "aging" of average gravity ales.

Now, I understand that some errors common to new brewers (underpitching, warm fermentations, etc.) can be "cleaned up" by spending a little more time in the primary. That's helpful advice for someone who has an off-flavor, but I repeatedly see simple questions of "how long does it take?" answered with "at least three weeks in primary, but the longer the better." While that advice won't hurt the beer (much), I think it has the potential to turn off some new brewers, not to mention giving some a crutch to lean on while their process could be improved.

Furthermore, if someone - even a well respected member like Yooper - gives a more realistic answer, it's usually followed by a chorus of "why risk it?", "what's the rush?", or "patience is a virtue". So as some food for thought, I figured I'd supply some rationale for the counter-question of "why wait?"

We can brew faster; we have the technology

It seems that many of the folks who advocate extended fermentations are really just talking about waiting for the beer to clear. While that may take several weeks at normal fermentation temps, you can reduce that to a couple of days - or even overnight - if you cold crash and / or use finings. You can usually find someone unloading an old fridge for free on craigslist, so unless you live in a tiny apartment, there's really no excuse for not having the ability to cold crash. Add in the fact that once you scrounge $40 - $70 for a temperature controller, you have yourself a fermentation chamber that allows you to brew far better beer than in your closet, this is kind of a no-brainer.

Finings are a little trickier subject. Gelatin is cheap, easy to use, and will clear a cold-crashed beer in a matter of hours. But I can understand if one (or one's friends/family) doesn't want animal products used in the production of their beer. There are also vegan alternatives, but I don't know how well they work. If they do their job even half as well as gelatin / isinglass, I don't see any reason not to use them. And before anyone says "Reinheitsgebot", keep in mind that the original didn't even include yeast, so maybe we shouldn't be using 15th century provincial laws to influence our brewing.

Reducing cycle time means that you can brew more often

What's going to help a new brewer more: looking at a fermenter in their basement, or brewing another batch? There's a recent book that posits that it takes about 10,000 hours of practice to become truly great at something. But I don't think you can count the time it took Calloway to make your golf clubs or Baldwin to make your piano. Once you pitch your yeast, it's their beer and you might as well move on to something else.

You need less equipment to maintain a pipeline

Depending on the beer and number of other beers I have on tap, it usually takes me about three weeks to kick a keg. Luckily, it takes about three weeks to get a batch ready to serve, so it all kind of works out. If I were to subscribe to the month long primary club, I'd need more kegs and probably more fermenters. And more fermentation chambers. And a place to store more kegs and more fermenters. And god help you if you choose to bottle.

You can drink "seasonally" with less planning

Despite what that glorified rat from Punxsutawney said, we had an early spring this year. I'd hate to be stuck with six more weeks of stouts when what I'm really in the mood for is a cream ale.

You might never get to sample your beer at its peak


While the word is filtering down that Hefes and IPAs are best when they're fresh, the truth is that it's true for most other beer styles as well. Unless you're talking a really big beer, it's going to be at its prime about 3 to 6 weeks after brew day. A good example is a basic Irish dry stout. I've seen folks say that any stout needs several months of conditioning, but that's just ridiculous for a 1.038 Guinness clone. My dry stouts clock in at about 1.042 and exhibit a fantastic silky, malty character that's completely gone if I let one go as far as two months after brew day.

I wanna be like Mike

I'm still one of the many who harbors delusions of going pro. Any brewer who stuck to the schedules advocated by many on this site would go broke in less than a year. Chances are that whatever your dream commercial beer is - the one that makes you say "if I could only brew like that" - it was packaged within three weeks of being brewed. There's no reason you can't do the same thing. And if you do want to turn this hobby into a living, you're going to have to figure out how.



I hope that at least some of these concepts make sense to some folks. I know that I won't be able to change the minds of the most vocal members of the month long primary club, but I hope that the more moderate members of the site might see how there might be valid reasons for sticking to a timely brewing schedule. I'm interested to know how y'all feel.
 
I'm with you.

I really think that people hear or read something on this site and regurgitate it as gospel.

I don't think all the rules are as hard and fast as some beginners (and exp brewers) make out.

I was recently looking up some info about some yeast I was using and came across the pro brewers site. On it they were talking about the yeast being great in that it was done fermenting in four days. It made me think, if these guys can get it done in four days, why do I need to wait three to four weeks to package.

I get the conditioning off, off flavours, but if you have done it properly from the start then you shouldn't need to.

So, I'm with you. If you brew and ferment properly you can package when fermentation has finished without long conditioning.

Gab.
 
I absolutely agree. I usually take hydrometer readings after as little as 6 days, and if FG is reached, it gets cold crashed and kegged or bottled. The yeast do clean up after themselves, but it doesn't always take a month, especially for a 1.042-1.050 beers.
A prime example is: I brewed a Hefeweizen that went to bottles after 1 week in the primary, followed by 2 weeks conditioning. It was great beer, and took 3 weeks from brew day to glass. Same thing with my batch of Amber Ale. Bigger beers benefit from longer primary time, but I don't brew big beers all that often.
 
I've had a batch of IPA brewed, fermented, cleared, bottle conditioned, and stomach conditioned in 2.5 weeks if you can believe it. It was great.
 
So, a question from a new brewer re: recipe being brewed tomorrow:

I'm making a blonde/cream type (it straddles the definitions, basically a touch too dark to qualify as cream, otherwise spot on), with a last-minute yeast change due to dead yeast beasties (yes, I did a started in advance, it's showing no signs of activity).

So.

6.6 lbs Breiss Pilsen Light LME
12 oz Honey malt
4 oz Victory malt (there was no biscuit, was told this was a good substitute, basically the American biscuit)
1oz Cluster hops, 60 min
Nottingham yeast (since the Amer. Ale is dead, bar a late night awakening)

Partial boil extract w/ grains, but almost full boil (4.5 gallons).

Perfect clarity isn't a concern, I'm making this one to contrast with the stout I made. That one is benefitting from some time, but it also had a long drive in the fermentor. I just want a lightly sweet, slightly malty summer beer, eh? The OG is forecast for 1.050, again, with Nottingham (so will be slightly more dry than I was planning, which may be for the best).

ANYWAY--Of course dependent on hydrometer readings, can less than 3 weeks ferment be expected? Should I start testing at one week (If obvious signs are down)?

Sorry for rambling and any spelling/grammar errors--nasty migraine has me on my ass. /forgiveplease
 
I know I'll prob get shot by some for this but....


If you have pitched good yeast and held ferm temps well and it's done after a week. Then you can bottle or keg, depending on your system.

I'd say once you have stable hydrometer readings over a few days, go ahead and package.

Gab.
 
Gab1788 said:
I know I'll prob get shot by some for this but....

If you have pitched good yeast and held ferm temps well and it's done after a week. Then you can bottle or keg, depending on your system.

I'd say once you have stable hydrometer readings over a few days, go ahead and package.

Gab.

Edit: your starter is prob fine, just check the gravity.
 
I've done both short fermentation/short bottle conditioning and long fermentation and bottle conditioning and I prefer the flavor I get from longer fermentation, especially the darker beers. You go ahead and do your short ferment, I'll just buy a couple more fermenters so I can have a good rotation schedule and have a beer to bottle/keg each weekend if I choose.
 
Some beers do benefit from sitting on the yeast for an extended amount of time, such as strong Belgians, or at least in my experience they do. While I did beat the drum of extended primaries back when I started brewing, I've come to realize for lower gravity ales it isn't really helping anything. Once I got my temperature control down, I usually only leave them in primary for 2 weeks max, then 5-7 days in secondary if I'm dry hopping. No cold crashing or fining agents for me though, and I'd say I produce fairly clear beer. On average I have beer brewed and packaged in a time span of 12-18 days.

Big beers all follow their own unique schedule though, but IMO, a beginner brewer shouldn't be tackling a 1.100 RIS for their first beer.

Patience is more of a virtue when bottle conditioning in my experience.
 
I think this is what the OP is saying. Big beers will benefit from extended fermentation and conditioning time.

OP and me are not arguing against that. But for 105x beers you can crank them out in a couple of weeks with kegging.

You don't always have to leave a beer on the cake for three to four weeks.

Gab.
 
I think this is what the OP is saying. Big beers will benefit from extended fermentation and conditioning time.

OP and me are not arguing against that. But for 105x beers you can crank them out in a couple of weeks with kegging.

You don't always have to leave a beer on the cake for three to four weeks.

Gab.

Not to mention if you're planning on using the yeast cake (or a portion of it) for your next batch you're only getting benefits of using it sooner rather than later.
 
When I advise nephew brewers to be patient and let a beer sit for four weeks, it's usually in response to "it's been a week and the instructions tell me I need to rack to secondary." I'm usually trying to drive home two points. First, don't worry about what the instructions say in regards to racking to secondary. If you ignore the secondary and leave your beer in primary, you don't have to worry about when it's time to rack. Second, for new brewers, it's better to not have this firm idea in your head about when you're going to have drinkable beer. So, I give a general "four weeks in primary, four weeks in bottles" response just to present a generalized realistic timeframe. Of course, I would advise a quicker turn around for anything with heavy hop flavor and aroma. Once a new brewer has a sense of how long a particular yeast in a particular beer takes to get the job done and can taste a warm, flat beer to see if it's done, by all means they should package as soon as is reasonable and drink the beer at its peak.

I usually have to base my packaging around when I have time to do it, especially with bottling. With beers that are being kegged, I don't have to worry about it as much.
 
I've had a batch of IPA brewed, fermented, cleared, bottle conditioned, and stomach conditioned in 2.5 weeks if you can believe it. It was great.

I know I'll prob get shot by some for this but....


If you have pitched good yeast and held ferm temps well and it's done after a week. Then you can bottle or keg, depending on your system.

I'd say once you have stable hydrometer readings over a few days, go ahead and package.

Gab.

Yep, me too. I am not one of the "month in primary" bandwagon members. A well-made beer doesn't need that.

The key there, though, is "well made beer". Proper yeast pitching rates, fermentation temperatures, quality ingredients, and so on, along with proper brewing techniques all play a role. Underpitching of yeast and too warm fermentation temperatures are a big flavor issue, and even conditioning will not fix it but might improve somewhat.

I package all of my ales generally by day 14 or so. But it has to have been at FG for at least a few days and the beer has to be pretty clear. Or else it just isn't "ready".

A beer that is ready to package should have been at FG for at least 3 days, and it should be fairly clear. If it's a yeasty cloudy mess, it isn't ready to package.
 
Sure, you can drink your beer at a young stage or at a more mature stage. I am of the mindset that the beer you drink at week 1 and week 4 are for intents and purposes just different beers. Is one better than the other? I don't know? I have been known to tap a 7 day old SMASH beer that was ok, not great, but WAS fresh.
In one sense it much like a persons lifespan in that is one chapter of a persons life more important than another, all are important and integral to one another.
If you like your beers young, drink em young. Personally, I have enough fermenters and two kegs to not get in a rush, I like tasting them at different stages but don't expect my beers to hit their stride until about 5 weeks after pitching yeast. I am pretty laid back in my approach to brewing, sanitation is tight, use good ingredients, crush my own grains, do iodine test for conversion, boil full volume vigorously, and use steady ferm temps in my basement, but don't or rarely take hydrometer readings, generally don't use secondaries as a rule.

As a general rule of thumb I would caution advising new comers to rush the process.
Beers evolve....
 
I agree with this post. For beginners I feel it is more important to learn how the fermentation works. Letting it sit for a month doesn't teach anyone anything.

Each beer you brew is going to have a slightly different fermentation schedule. I usually take my OG then let it rip for 4-7 days depending on how big the beer is. If after a week I am done fermenting then it's time to crash and then package.
 
I too think it is a matter of brewing practices and specifics about the beer. I have gone to 10-14 days in the fermentor since I started using large starters, good aeration, temp chambers (probably the biggest factor), cold crashing and filtering. I have had tasty good ESBs in as little as 2 weeks.

When I was not controlling temps I would let the beer sit in the primary for at least 3 weeks and I think it helped.
 
I agree with everybody.

:mug: I was kinda thinkin' the same thing. No doubt you can turn many ales around very quickly if you pitch enough yeast and control temps. I've gone grain to glass in under two weeks when kegging, and could easily do that more quickly with many a light ale. I regularly package ales after ~2 weeks and they turn out great. But, and this is a big but, I have noticed that many beers benefit from and extra week or two on the cake, 3-4 weeks total. It's not a 'clean up' thing, if there's any clean up, that happens within a day or two of FG, and really shouldn't be necessary if you're treating your yeast properly and controlling temps. It's a maturation thing, obviously if you give a beer a bit more time, it continues to mature. So if leave it a week or two longer before packaging, it'll be a week or two more conditioned once it's carbed. This can help with clarity, and honestly with flavor. The flavors in a matured beer really come together. Obviously, with beers like IPA and wheat beer, this isn't the best choice, drink those young and hazy. But with a nice NEB or a strong bitter, that week or two can make a big difference.
Really, if you 'need' that extra time for 'clean up', you may want to take a look at your process and adjust some things. A well made, avg gravity beer really only needs a couple few days after FG to be 'done'. But leaving a well made brew on the cake for a few extra weeks definitely won't hurt it, it may even help it along a bit.
 
I'm going to present a somewhat different attitude toward the thesis presented in the OP, but perhaps not a common one.

It stems from the fact that, yes, I know that with just a very ordinary K.I.S.S. setup like mine, I can be drinking a very tolerable Hefeweizen in three weeks. No argument; agreement.

I also know that if I adopted techniques like cold crashing, finings, etc., that I can decrease the time needed to produce a drinkable beer.

So- yeah, I understand these things. What's my problem?

I'm not in that much of a hurry.

I realize that goes against a great deal in popular culture and in the whole history of this great nation, but.....there it is. I'm not going anywhere in a hurry, and I just. Don't. Care.

I've got three white plastic buckets, and each rotates through in a month. If I bought two more buckets, I could brew a 5 gal. batch a week and violate the law. But why should I? I go through maybe 15 batches of beer a year. Brew day comes, I've milled my malt the previous day, I put the beer together, throw it in the fermenter, hit it with a dose of O2 and pitch, snap the lid on and forget it for 30 days. At the end of that time, it's invariably finished, and I bottle. Condition a month, and it's great. So it takes two months, so what? My shelves have plenty of beer on them, what's my hurry?

The answer may be that there's nothing in any of this about being "modern and progressive," it's still just "different strokes." And mine are.
 
Some yests floc better than others...Some beers are liked young...some like them old. I find Sierra Nevada Big foot to be pretty nasty when it's fresh. But once it ages the hops and malts oxidize well and create more complexity. Some prefer the immediate umph of all the hops and alcohol bite with a fresh bottle.

Good beer can be made quick. My last stout was bottled after one week...and drank a week later. It was very nice...After three months it was just as good.
 
But, and this is a big but, I have noticed that many beers benefit from and extra week or two on the cake, 3-4 weeks total. It's not a 'clean up' thing, if there's any clean up, that happens within a day or two of FG, and really shouldn't be necessary if you're treating your yeast properly and controlling temps. It's a maturation thing, obviously if you give a beer a bit more time, it continues to mature. So if leave it a week or two longer before packaging, it'll be a week or two more conditioned once it's carbed. This can help with clarity, and honestly with flavor.

Is there any meaningful difference between letting it sit an extra week on the yeast and an extra week in the keg?

While most of my beers ferment 11 or 18 days (depending on whether I dry hop) and then cold crash for 2-3 days before kegging, I can tell that they're changing and maturing for the next week while in the keg and carbonated.

For example, I notice that my milk stout (lots of roasted grains in there) can easily be packaged in 2 weeks. It continues to change and mature in the keg and it really comes together at about the 4-5 week mark. I just see no benefit to leaving it in the fermenter for that maturation when I can just as easily get it into the keg and have room in the fermenter for another beer.
 
Good thread, folks. I'm in your corner, and only have a little to add at the moment.

When I was at Bell's, many moons ago, we typically released beer for sale 14 days after brewing. Basically, a week in ferm, a week bottle conditioning. It was assumed that the beers would see about a week in transit from brewery to consumer, so they would then be 3 weeks brew to glass. At Rogue beers were maybe 14 days brew to release, this is typical of other packaging facilities I have worked in. Pubs tend to shoot for a 14 day flip, but I have done as little as 10 days (maybe less, I don't recall) with ales fermented in a spundig equipped tank. These beers were unfiltered, but cold crashed with a couple yeast drops for clarity. At home, I have turned a beer over in as little as 8 days (4 days ferm, 2 crashed, 2 days carbing with CO2 stone). These were pretty basic extract beers for a party... essentially ale versions of Helles and Marzen using 100% DME, noble hops and S-04. They were still a bit cloudy, not bad, but perfectly drinkable. BTW, I am not ADVOCATING an 8 day beer... those beers would have improved with another week or two in the ferm, but they were good for the party in question. The point is that it CAN be done and still have a good beer.
 
Although I've been brewing for close to 5 years now, I like to read through the beginners forum in the hopes that I can give something back to the HBT community which has helped me out greatly over much of that time. However, I think there is a cadre of very vocal members who are giving misleading advice regarding the "aging" of average gravity ales.

Now, I understand that some errors common to new brewers (underpitching, warm fermentations, etc.) can be "cleaned up" by spending a little more time in the primary. That's helpful advice for someone who has an off-flavor, but I repeatedly see simple questions of "how long does it take?" answered with "at least three weeks in primary, but the longer the better." While that advice won't hurt the beer (much), I think it has the potential to turn off some new brewers, not to mention giving some a crutch to lean on while their process could be improved.

Furthermore, if someone - even a well respected member like Yooper - gives a more realistic answer, it's usually followed by a chorus of "why risk it?", "what's the rush?", or "patience is a virtue". So as some food for thought, I figured I'd supply some rationale for the counter-question of "why wait?"

We can brew faster; we have the technology

It seems that many of the folks who advocate extended fermentations are really just talking about waiting for the beer to clear. While that may take several weeks at normal fermentation temps, you can reduce that to a couple of days - or even overnight - if you cold crash and / or use finings. You can usually find someone unloading an old fridge for free on craigslist, so unless you live in a tiny apartment, there's really no excuse for not having the ability to cold crash. Add in the fact that once you scrounge $40 - $70 for a temperature controller, you have yourself a fermentation chamber that allows you to brew far better beer than in your closet, this is kind of a no-brainer.

Finings are a little trickier subject. Gelatin is cheap, easy to use, and will clear a cold-crashed beer in a matter of hours. But I can understand if one (or one's friends/family) doesn't want animal products used in the production of their beer. There are also vegan alternatives, but I don't know how well they work. If they do their job even half as well as gelatin / isinglass, I don't see any reason not to use them. And before anyone says "Reinheitsgebot", keep in mind that the original didn't even include yeast, so maybe we shouldn't be using 15th century provincial laws to influence our brewing.

Reducing cycle time means that you can brew more often

What's going to help a new brewer more: looking at a fermenter in their basement, or brewing another batch? There's a recent book that posits that it takes about 10,000 hours of practice to become truly great at something. But I don't think you can count the time it took Calloway to make your golf clubs or Baldwin to make your piano. Once you pitch your yeast, it's their beer and you might as well move on to something else.

You need less equipment to maintain a pipeline

Depending on the beer and number of other beers I have on tap, it usually takes me about three weeks to kick a keg. Luckily, it takes about three weeks to get a batch ready to serve, so it all kind of works out. If I were to subscribe to the month long primary club, I'd need more kegs and probably more fermenters. And more fermentation chambers. And a place to store more kegs and more fermenters. And god help you if you choose to bottle.

You can drink "seasonally" with less planning

Despite what that glorified rat from Punxsutawney said, we had an early spring this year. I'd hate to be stuck with six more weeks of stouts when what I'm really in the mood for is a cream ale.

You might never get to sample your beer at its peak


While the word is filtering down that Hefes and IPAs are best when they're fresh, the truth is that it's true for most other beer styles as well. Unless you're talking a really big beer, it's going to be at its prime about 3 to 6 weeks after brew day. A good example is a basic Irish dry stout. I've seen folks say that any stout needs several months of conditioning, but that's just ridiculous for a 1.038 Guinness clone. My dry stouts clock in at about 1.042 and exhibit a fantastic silky, malty character that's completely gone if I let one go as far as two months after brew day.

I wanna be like Mike

I'm still one of the many who harbors delusions of going pro. Any brewer who stuck to the schedules advocated by many on this site would go broke in less than a year. Chances are that whatever your dream commercial beer is - the one that makes you say "if I could only brew like that" - it was packaged within three weeks of being brewed. There's no reason you can't do the same thing. And if you do want to turn this hobby into a living, you're going to have to figure out how.



I hope that at least some of these concepts make sense to some folks. I know that I won't be able to change the minds of the most vocal members of the month long primary club, but I hope that the more moderate members of the site might see how there might be valid reasons for sticking to a timely brewing schedule. I'm interested to know how y'all feel.

Que slow clap....
 
Is there any meaningful difference between letting it sit an extra week on the yeast and an extra week in the keg?

No- conditioning time is conditioning time whether it happens in a bucket, carboy, keg or bottle. What IS important, though, is temperature. Beer ages faster at room temperature. For a beer that needs some aging, room temperature is great. For a beer that is absolutely perfect the way it is, it's good to slow down the aging so cellaring or even cold storage is preferable.

In an unfiltered beer, there are hundreds of billions of yeast in suspension. Nothing "magical" happens to the beer by sitting on top of flocculated yeast, so the actual conditioning is done by the yeast in suspension anyway.
 
There are lots of great points made by all. I'm one of those month primary people because I think that's when my beers tend to taste the best. But it's definitely an issue of style and personal preference. Beers with hop character start losing that character right away so as time ticks down the beer losing some of the fresh hop quality. Personally I do a lot of malt forward beers (and very few hoppy) and I feel those tend to be best about 6-8 weeks out when the malt flavors and yeast flavors have had time to meld into a really good product. I would probably lager those beers during that time if I had the equipment.

Anything with good hop character should be out of the primary as soon as fermentation ends and you give it a few days for clean up (whether it is in primary, secondary, keg, etc.). I had an eye opening experience at the New Belgium tour. They gave us fat tire that was two hours off the bottling line. It was a completely different beer from what I've found on tap, in cans, or bottles. Lots of really good hop character. I assume they designed the recipe to taste less hoppy when it gets to the consumer but that fresh fat tire had lots of good hop flavor. I'm not a huge fat tire fan but it was actually delicious. So anything relying on hop flavor would definitely get packaged asap at my house.
 
No- conditioning time is conditioning time whether it happens in a bucket, carboy, keg or bottle. What IS important, though, is temperature. Beer ages faster at room temperature. For a beer that needs some aging, room temperature is great. For a beer that is absolutely perfect the way it is, it's good to slow down the aging so cellaring or even cold storage is preferable.

In an unfiltered beer, there are hundreds of billions of yeast in suspension. Nothing "magical" happens to the beer by sitting on top of flocculated yeast, so the actual conditioning is done by the yeast in suspension anyway.

Well said :mug:
 
Is there any meaningful difference between letting it sit an extra week on the yeast and an extra week in the keg?

Well, I think that depends on where the keg is. At room temp, only enough pressure to seat the seal, no. It's basically in a 'secondary' at that point. In my kegerator, carbing or carbed, being pulled to taste here n there, sure. Big difference, IMO. I think Yoop explains it pretty well so I'll avoid a second take at the details.

No- conditioning time is conditioning time whether it happens in a bucket, carboy, keg or bottle. What IS important, though, is temperature. Beer ages faster at room temperature. For a beer that needs some aging, room temperature is great. For a beer that is absolutely perfect the way it is, it's good to slow down the aging so cellaring or even cold storage is preferable.

In an unfiltered beer, there are hundreds of billions of yeast in suspension. Nothing "magical" happens to the beer by sitting on top of flocculated yeast, so the actual conditioning is done by the yeast in suspension anyway.

Pretty much how I see it. Beers like pale ale and wheats, package 'em fast and drink 'em up, no reason not to if your process is solid. But if a beer benefits from some age (talking a few weeks here, not long term), leave it in the fermenter, no reason not to and maybe some reasons to. :mug:
 
I have watched the wait for fermentation to finish then package faction and the you must leave your beer alone for a month faction. I have then paid attention to how my fermentations have gone. Some finish quickly and others have still been fermenting after 10+ days.

So, just to make things easy for me I ferment for about 3 weeks, bottle condition for 2 weeks and check one out.

I have a bucket, 2 six gallon Better Bottles, 1 five gallon Better Bottle, 2 three gallon water bottles and 8 five gallon buckets (but only 2 lids) which I can use for fermentation. So, equipment does not come into the picture for how long to ferment. I brew on average every 2 weeks and have about 8 varieties to choose from so getting one finished is not a high priority.
 
This should be a sticky right beside the 24-72 hours thread and continually linked with that time heals all wounds business.
 
I agree with this thread. I generally brew low-medium gravity beers. I'll do a week or two of fermentation, maybe three if I'm adding hops or other stuff, then bottle or keg it. If it's bottled, I'll set a few bottles aside to "age" for a few months, but if it's kegged I generally carb it up, tap it, and drink it fresh. I've got limited space and equipment, so having a pipeline of big aged beers isn't really practical for me.
 
I really like this thread. I've been brewing for a year and a half. Been AG for just over a year. I got most of my info on this site while converting it with my setup. Sometimes this site can be very discouraging with skeptical advice. I think I make good beer and I'm always wondering if I need to make changes to my process, aging, when to bottle etc... I then realize that my process is very sound for my setup. I did take into consideration awhile back of leaving my beer in the primary for 3 weeks before I package. Since then my average gravity beers 1.050-1.060 (which is what my range is most of the time) have come out extremely better. Thats 3 weeks primary, 2 weeks DH (if i do and i always do it in the primary) and package. Taste after 1 week, then drink them after the 2nd. I would like to say though, my process, fermentation temperature, yeast control, pitching rates and better understanding of each style also contributed to a wonderful final product. Im always looking to better myself and think about making changes but I realize then why change something that's been working great? So I keep all what I do the same cause it's MY way, MY system and MY beer. I don't like to give advice most of the time cause it's really up to the brewer IMO. I have a DFH 120 clone that's 14.87% and I have enjoyed drinking it every step of the way and it's only 3months since brewed. Most would think I'm crazy to drink them so young. I love tasting the difference from one week to the next. I agree with everybody on here especially the OP. I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing cause it works for me.

Great thread. I look forward to keep reading this.

Cheers.
 
I'm all in with the OP. In fact, I sorta gave up on the new brewer forum over this exact issue.

EDIT: sounded more combative than is useful.

Thanks for posting this thread!
 
I think this is what the OP is saying. Big beers will benefit from extended fermentation and conditioning time.

OP and me are not arguing against that. But for 105x beers you can crank them out in a couple of weeks with kegging.

You don't always have to leave a beer on the cake for three to four weeks.

Gab.


Right, but i think for a new brewer it's better to err on the side of caution and let it sit. I'm not sure what point the OP is really trying to make because it all seems to be in response to stuff he sees in the beginner brewers section. I think getting a stable F.G. then letting it sit a a few more days, just in case, is completely reasonable advice.
I mean how many times do you see people freaking out about their beer after 4 or 5 days? Taking a gravity reading every day, popping the lid, taking pics,etc.
"Set it and FORGET it."
 
Right, but i think for a new brewer it's better to err on the side of caution and let it sit.

That's a really good point. As a beginner it's probably best to be a little patient until you get your process down. Once you're familiar with how a yeast strain is going to perform, you'll have a better idea of what to expect. When you have a solid process, you can turn around beers rather quickly if you choose.
 
NordeastBrewer77 said:
That's a really good point. As a beginner it's probably best to be a little patient until you get your process down. Once you're familiar with how a yeast strain is going to perform, you'll have a better idea of what to expect. When you have a solid process, you can turn around beers rather quickly if you choose.

for me, this is the crux of the matter. I infer from many posts here that some brewers simply inherit "1-month primary" as axiomatic and therefore never pay attention to what a strain does at 1 week that's different from 2 weeks, etc. OTOH, threads like this offer a thoughtful (and, I hope, thought-provoking) alternative view.

Sometimes i wonder if having a set rule prevents critical thinking, or if it's just the character of the brewer that makes him myopic or adventurous.
 
I too have to agree with the OP. If you are familiar with the yeast, control your pitching rate, and control your fermentation temps extended time in primary isn't necessary. I normally package after week two if I have reached FG and enjoy my beer considerably and I always get good responses from the people that drink them too. Of course my 1.080 OG Baltic Porter is going to sit in the primary a while as the yeast I'm using is slow and it will benefit from aging, but this is not my typical brew.
 
for me, this is the crux of the matter. I infer from many posts here that some brewers simply inherit "1-month primary" as axiomatic and therefore never pay attention to what a strain does at 1 week that's different from 2 weeks, etc. OTOH, threads like this offer a thoughtful (and, I hope, thought-provoking) alternative view.

Sometimes i wonder if having a set rule prevents critical thinking, or if it's just the character of the brewer that makes him myopic or adventurous.

Yeah, I kinda get the same thing. For those brewers, the one month primary is probably a good plan of attack.
 
I too have to agree with the OP. If you are familiar with the yeast, control your pitching rate, and control your fermentation temps extended time in primary isn't necessary. I normally package after week two if I have reached FG and enjoy my beer considerably and I always get good responses from the people that drink them too. Of course my 1.080 OG Baltic Porter is going to sit in the primary a while as the yeast I'm using is slow and it will benefit from aging, but this is not my typical brew.

If you're good with these three things then you're probably not considered a beginner. The OP is "upset" because when he trolls the beginning beer forums he's seeing alot of stock advice on being patient. I think telling someone to leave it alone for 2-3 weeks is much better advice than, "Open up your fermenter every couple days and take a reading, so you can 'learn' from it."
Not really sure why someone would be worried because other brewers aren't "turning" their beer around as fast as they could be? Fermenters are like $25. Just keep adding fermenters till you're brewing and bottling schedule is comfortable for you and you have more beer than you can drink.
 
If you're good with these three things then you're probably not considered a beginner. The OP is "upset" because when he trolls the beginning beer forums he's seeing alot of stock advice on being patient. I think telling someone to leave it alone for 2-3 weeks is much better advice than, "Open up your fermenter every couple days and take a reading, so you can 'learn' from it."
Not really sure why someone would be worried because other brewers aren't "turning" their beer around as fast as they could be? Fermenters are like $25. Just keep adding fermenters till you're brewing and bottling schedule is comfortable for you and you have more beer than you can drink.

I only have 8 batches under my belt, half of them all grain. I would still consider myself a beginner, but I agree there are many people in the beginner's area that don't do the proper research and don't have realistic expectations. I would love to add another $15 Ale Pail or two to my brewhouse, but I don't have enough room until I can turn my spare fridge into a fermentation chamber. Until then, I will brew beers that I can go grain to glass in 3.5-5 weeks apart from the occasional big beer.
 
Experience with your yeast strain of choice is the single biggest factor to me. Learning how long it takes to ferment, at what temps. Learning at which temps it ferments clean. Learning when to ramp-up the temp. It varies with every yeast.

Once you learn a process that works for you, and your favorite yeast, it becomes much easier to turn beers over faster.
 
Back
Top