Commercial "Bottle Conditioned" Beers?

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and Bell's Two Hearted are two that come to mind, they claim to be bottle conditioned, but the amount of residual yeast in the bottom is tiny...nothing compared to homebrew bottle conditioned beers. What is the deal?

Note: The belgian bottle conditioned beers are the exception, they have plenty of yeast at the bottom.

alcibiades said:

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and Bell's Two Hearted are two that come to mind, they claim to be bottle conditioned, but the amount of residual yeast in the bottom is tiny...nothing compared to homebrew bottle conditioned beers. What is the deal?

Note: The belgian bottle conditioned beers are the exception, they have plenty of yeast at the bottom.

Click to expand...

They are way better at it than most of us.

Belgian beers are re-fermented in the bottles.

alcibiades said:

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and Bell's Two Hearted are two that come to mind, they claim to be bottle conditioned, but the amount of residual yeast in the bottom is tiny...nothing compared to homebrew bottle conditioned beers. What is the deal?

Note: The belgian bottle conditioned beers are the exception, they have plenty of yeast at the bottom.

Click to expand...

I've heard that Sierra Nevada Pale Ale is filtered and then a tiny controlled amount of yeast is added to carb it.

Nearly every commercial bottle conditioned beer is filtered or centrifuged and has yeast added back, including the Belgians.

I believe that Belgian beers have more sediment because you are buying them at a year old vs 4 weeks maybe for a Sierra Nevada.

Rogue beers are not bottle conditioned and the unfiltered ones have quite a bit of sediment.

remilard said:

Nearly every commercial bottle conditioned beer is filtered or centrifuged and has yeast added back, including the Belgians.

I believe that Belgian beers have more sediment because you are buying them at a year old vs 4 weeks maybe for a Sierra Nevada.

Click to expand...

Most Belgians (aside from sours) aren't nearly that old when sold. They simply can't afford to warehouse beer for long periods of time or tie up the fermenters.

Rochefort, for instance, does 7 days in primary (68-73F), 3 days in a cold secondary (48F), and then is bottled and spends 10 days at 73F before being sent out the door for sale. That's 3 weeks from grain to glass if you get it fresh off the truck; obviously shipping time to America and store shelf time add to that.

Most of the other Trappist beers (including Chimay, Westmalle, and Achel) are on fairly similar schedules, maybe up to a week or so longer.

The 2 longest turnarounds for Trappists are Orval and Westvleteren, which are both about 2 months or a hair more.

Orval takes a bit longer (after 4 days in primary and 3 weeks in secondary) because they bottle condition at 58F, which takes 5 weeks or so. That's probably done in part because they use Brett in the bottle.

Westvleteren takes longer because they lager it--it's like 5 days primary, 3 weeks secondary, 4 weeks lagering, and then 10 days in the bottle before being sold.

SumnerH said:

Most Belgians (aside from sours) aren't nearly that old when sold. They simply can't afford to warehouse beer for long periods of time or tie up the fermenters.

Click to expand...

I was assuming the person I was responding to lives in North America. Where travel time and poor turnover make the amount of time between which the brewery sold the beer and the retail sale fairly long.

I've thought about this and wondered if it has to do with the volume they are bottling. Say they store 7 or 10 or 100 bbls in a bright tank @ 37 degrees or something.. A vast amount of the yeast drops out of suspension, then they rack off the trub and bottle. Seems like it would be pretty darn clean, unfiltered beer.

Smuttynose IPA has a healthy amount in the dregs.

RegionalChaos said:

I've thought about this and wondered if it has to do with the volume they are bottling. Say they store 7 or 10 or 100 bbls in a bright tank @ 37 degrees or something.. A vast amount of the yeast drops out of suspension, then they rack off the trub and bottle. Seems like it would be pretty darn clean, unfiltered beer.

Click to expand...

But it is filtered at both of the breweries listed in the OP.

Bells Oberon is bottle conditioned and Bells uses the same yeast for all of their beers, supposedly. A house yeast, as they say.

Not all sediment is yeast...

Randar said:

Bells Oberon is bottle conditioned and Bells uses the same yeast for all of their beers, supposedly. A house yeast, as they say.

Click to expand...

I think Bell's Oberon, like Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, is filtered. They add back a little yeast to bottle-condition after filtering.

I understand the concept of filtering it and then adding a bit of yeast prior to bottling it, but does that mean they don't actually use the yeast to carbonate the beer?

It seems to me that using yeast to carbonate MUST leave a healthy yeast sediment (like our homebrew). Sierra nevada is crystal clear. I still don't understand how they claim it is bottle conditioned!

I just drank a few Loose Cannon IPAs which were relatively clear, with no sediment at the bottom, which they too claim are "bottle conditioned."

escalante88 said:

Smuttynose IPA has a healthy amount in the dregs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've noticed that. But even smuttynose has about half the dregs the average homebrew has. Do they "half bottle condition?" If so, what is the advantage of doing that?

On the beers that I successfully treated with gelatin I have very little on the bottom of the bottles. I can pour the entire bottle and everything that's left just stays behind as a thin cloudy layer.

Well, they dont claim to do it, they actually do it. Sierra Nevada has it down to a perfect science. They have figured out EXACTLY how much yeast/sugar to add to get the carbonatoin level they want. No more, no less. We end up with so much sediment because there is a ton of yeast left in suspension. A lot of yeast left in suspension isn't necessary for bottle conditioning. I've had a cider which bulk aged for 4 months carb up quite nicely and leave virtually no sediment (like Sierra Nevada).

Allagash Tripel is a good example.

Also, I know that Goose Island bottle conditions, and as I recall there was a bit of yeast at the bottom of the bottle of Sofie that I tried.

I've gotten a small ammount of yeast sediment buildup when I cold crash for a week in the fermenter then rack off and bottle condition. I was worried at first that their would not be enough yeast to carb but it worked fine.

SumnerH said:

I think Bell's Oberon, like Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, is filtered. They add back a little yeast to bottle-condition after filtering.

Click to expand...

Bell's does not filter any of their beers. They rack to a bright tank for a few days before bottling, but don't add any yeast. In the case of Oberon, I'd guess they skip the bright tank, to keep it cloudy. Sierra Nevada does filter, then adds a calculated amount of yeast slurry/sugar at bottling.

Dogfish Head's Squall IPA doesn't appear to have much sediment at the bottom of the bottle either.

Bottle conditioned beer from most of the bigger craft breweries Sierra and Deuchutes is centrifuged then krausened (measured amount of unfermented beer added) so very little yeast ends up on the bottom of the bottle. Beers like Rogue (unfiltered)do not go through a centrifuge therefore have yeast on the bottom of the bottle depending on how long the beer was crashed in the tank prior to bottling.

Beers from most of the bigger craft breweries use a centrifuge to filter their beer then to bottle condition, they Krausen, (adding a measured amount of unfermented wort) to the beer resulting in a very clear beer with a little sediment. Rogue uses a wine filter for filtered beer or no filter at all. Something like Brutal IPA will have some yeast and other sediment depending on how long it sat in the tank before racking or bottling because it is not filtered. Brutal is actually not bottle conditioned.

Southern Tier Live is definitely bottle conditioned, and tasty.