Time in the primary

So, I know I have to give my next brew more time in the primary. Then I noticed at the beer and wine store, their directions say not to leave the wort in the primary bucket for more than 5 days. I am confused, why would they direct people that way. Oh, and the kit I have been using is Festa Brew. Their directions are not as explicit, but still not a lot of time in the primary bucket. http://www.magnotta.com/Festabrew/resources/06FESTA HomeBrew.pdf

Can some one let me know what the risk is for leaving this wort in the bucket for longer, as you all have advised that you need almost three weeks in the primary.

No risk at all. I have left them in primary for several months without issues.

There is no risk to leaving the wort/beer in the bucket for three weeks. The people at the store are mistaken. If it were me, I would ask them what their motivation is as it is a rather curious stance.

MichaelBrock said:

There is no risk to leaving the wort/beer in the bucket for three weeks. The people at the store are mistaken. If it were me, I would ask them what their motivation is as it is a rather curious stance.

Click to expand...

their motivation is to sell more kits at a faster pace

"my beer tastes like crap"

"you did something wrong, here buy another kit from us"

"but the guys on HBT said to wait 2-3 weeks and most said not to bother with a secondary"

"what do they know? they're not selling you anything"

There's good reason for the confusion. Historically with homebrewing, the process has been modeled around commercial brewing concepts and processes. This has led to some recommended procedures, like short primaries and "necessary" secondaries, that are really geared around production optimization and problems that plague beer only in a large scale. What many of us have realized, through experience, is that those processes can be bent in our relatively small scale brewing. Yet, there are still many people out there who hold on to the traditional concepts. There's nothing "wrong" with these procedures, but it's extra work that, turns out, doesn't really benefit our small scale and therefore isn't worth the effort.

The "concern" with long primaries is that yeast will eventually reach autolysis (or death) and this can cause off flavors if the beer continues to rest on this dead yeast. This is more of a problem when you're dealing with 10 gallons of yeast as opposed to a few cups of yeast. It takes literally months for autolysis to be a problem in small batch brewing. Hope that helps to explain the confusion for you!

unionrdr said:

That's it basically. Yeast quality then wasn't what it is now. autolysis is a thing of the past on our scale of brewing. So I leave mine in primary till it reaches FG. Then another 3-7 days to clean up by products of fermentation & settle out clear or slightly misty. Then bottle.

Click to expand...

Union, if I had a dollar for everytime I heard you say "clear or slightly misty" I'd be rich!

This is the most asked and discussed topic on here, on a daily basis there are 5 or six treads on this.

This discussion has been thoroughly covered in this thread, it's become the "uber discussion" on this topic.

To Secondary or Not? John Palmer and Jamil Zainasheff Weigh In .

Jayhem said:

Union, if I had a dollar for everytime I heard you say "clear or slightly misty" I'd be rich!

Click to expand...

Hahaha. Just thought the same thing. I swear he's got a keyboard shortcut to auto-populate that phrase.

...not that it is bad advice, by any means.

I was joshing him on another thread about that.

but really, it's good advice and he's just hammering it to get the point across

freisste said:

Hahaha. Just thought the same thing. I swear he's got a keyboard shortcut to auto-populate that phrase.

...not that it is bad advice, by any means.

Click to expand...

GrogNerd said:

I was joshing him on another thread about that.

but really, it's good advice and he's just hammering it to get the point across

Click to expand...

I didn't auto quote or anything,but I'm begining to think I should do something of the kind,as I'm sure revvy does. Lord knows I repeat it enough. And yes,I am trying to hammer it into folks,as it flat out works,it's better for the beer,& takes little effort from me. And it's all from personal observation.

Jayhem said:

Union, if I had a dollar for everytime I heard you say "clear or slightly misty" I'd be rich!

Click to expand...

If I was paid to say those things,I could brew more beer myself!

revco said:

........... This has led to some recommended procedures, like short primaries and "necessary" secondaries, that are really geared around production optimization and problems that plague beer only in a large scale. What many of us have realized, through experience, is that those processes can be bent in our relatively small scale brewing. Yet, there are still many people out there who hold on to the traditional concepts. There's nothing "wrong" with these procedures, but it's extra work that, turns out, doesn't really benefit our small scale and therefore isn't worth the effort.

Click to expand...

The above is true. However I wouldn't be so quick to say there is no benefit on our small scale. In the controlled experiments that have been done (BYO primary/secondary exp.) almost all of the tasters could tell there was a difference in the beers produced with either method. The big deal though was the tasters were roughly split in half as to which one they preferred. The upshot is then is try a beer both ways and decide which you like. There are more risks associated with using a secondary, but one might find that the flavors you get are worth the risk. The risks are easily minimized with just a little care

revco said:

The "concern" with long primaries is that yeast will eventually reach autolysis (or death) and this can cause off flavors if the beer continues to rest on this dead yeast. This is more of a problem when you're dealing with 10 gallons of yeast as opposed to a few cups of yeast. It takes literally months for autolysis to be a problem in small batch brewing. Hope that helps to explain the confusion for you!

Click to expand...

Autolysis is no myth, it is basic microbiology. The true myth is that it produces off flavors. I just finally got around to opening a 1 liter bottle of yeast poured out of a keg that has been sitting on my basement floor for at least 2 years. No off aromas whatsoever. I filmed the opening (video link here) I suspect a good part of the difference in tastes in the BYO experiment linked above are in fact the result of autolysis. So not only does autolysis not produce off flavors, it actually results in flavors many people like, ask any wine drinker. Wine makers make extensive use of autolysis (aging on the lees)

As to the OP's question, the beer needs to stay in the primary at least until fermentation is complete. This can be as short as 5 days for a lower ABV beer or up to two weeks for a higher ABV beer. After that is the conditioning phase, and that can be done in the primary or in a secondary

Just for reference, I have done two of the exact same kits One was primaried for one week, secondaried for two weeks, then kegged and rested for 2 more weeks before drinking.

The second one, I primaried for 3 weeks, kegged, then rested for an additional two weeks before drinking.

Now mind you, my brewing set up calls for less than ideal situations for true scientific research. One was brewed during the late summer, the other the fall, but I do my best to keep fermentation temps around 64 F. for at least the initial week. And I do a good job of that. But it's a basic set up, so there could be variations all over the place.

That being said, you could tell these were the same beers, but there was definitely something different about the two. The first one definitely had some off flavors to it. Nothing terrible, but it had a harsbit of a bite it early and left a bit of a lingering after taste as well. The second one, definitely did not have these off flavors to it. It still had a bit of an extractyness to it, but over all was very very good and drank exactly as how I would expected it to. And my friends agreed.

Now, I don't pull anything off primary for at least 3 weeks. I do believe that the yeast is doing something to the beer to clean up the flavors. I didn't ever redo anothe kit before going all-grain, but the three other kits I did early on, before switching to 3 weeks, all had similar flavors to the kit I did redo. And now, since it seems to be a consensus on here as well as with my other homebrewing friends, 3 weeks is just the norm now. For me it's a big part of better beer.

Clonefan94 said:

3 weeks is just the norm now. For me it's a big part of better beer.

Click to expand...

this is my thinkings, at least for 'normal-sized' beers, which I define as 1.055 ± .010

3 weeks and you don't have to worry, "is it done?"

just take FG reading, rack and bottle

i read the directions you posted and those are fine directions. if the LHBS interprets those directions to say "do not leave the beer in the primary for more than 5 days," then that is a misinterpretation.

Good stuff. Thanks guys. I am pitching a Cream Ale tonight, as my wife finds the Bock too malty and heavy(I love it!). So, I am going to leave it in the primary until it hits the FG, I may rack it and leave it for a bit longer. It all depends on when I get through the Bock so I can use the bottles. Anyone not suggest this methodology?

And again thanks so much for your help with this and my last crisis. You guys have made me start to think about some more advanced methods, like making my own wort soon.

Cheers,

I remember years ago 18+ or so when we first started brewing the guy at the local shop told us as soon as you see it stop bubbling, bottle it. I have no fuggin idea how we didn't have bottle bombs. We would not go over 7 days no matter what. We made very ****ty beer back then too, only had a few batches worth drinking..

My normal beers are 2-3 weeks in primary usually getting cold crashed for 2 days and bottled around the 3rd week time frame.

GrogNerd said:

their motivation is to sell more kits at a faster pace

"my beer tastes like crap"

"you did something wrong, here buy another kit from us"

"but the guys on HBT said to wait 2-3 weeks and most said not to bother with a secondary"

"what do they know? they're not selling you anything"

Click to expand...

He he.....the one I like is: There's a lot of crazies on the internet...beware of stranger advice!


OP, yeah, you're going to get a lot of bad advice, and some of it will even be from the internet, but the great thing about this place is generally speaking if someone gives you bad advice, it won't be more then a couple minutes before cooler heads prevail and come along to set you straight. You're fine leaving it on the yeast cake for longer. The longest I've done is 3 months on a Belgian Dark Strong..but for Ales, I typically leave it 4-6 weeks on the yeast cake and I dryhop right in the primary.

So, here is a question. If I bottle from the primary.... Do I need a filter? Or should I rack to keep the yeast cake clear of the siphon?

A filter isn't needed, just rack off and leave all the trub you can in the primary. You can filter to keep the trub out of your beer, but if careful it shouldn't be an issue.