Does "no secondary" equal "shooting yourself in the foot

CornyKegs 728
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.
M

misterbk

Active Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
38
Reaction score
3
Brew-science newbie here. (My second 5-gal batch is in the closet now.) My roommate brews too and is less of a newbie, he's been doing it for a few years and understands the process better than I do so far.

We've been using a process where we let the beer sit for an extended time in primary, letting the beer sit in the carboy until it clears up and reaches FG and then siphoning out rather than racking to a secondary. We get good flavors and good clarity, but it has me wondering if we're missing out.

The factors leading to our extended-primary decision were:
* Limited space for equipment
* Less effort = more fun
* Great results so far, as far as we can tell.
* Having read that this might actually be a good thing (no way I could say where my roomie saw this, at very least he heard there was interest in this process.)

We have several things to dial down for sure, before we'd even consider saying we're doing everything right. The beer comes out great, but not always quite what we tried to make. I'm working on fermentation temp control (right now it's just ambient temperature which is 71 degrees), and a keezer for serving what we've made. Just wondering because everybody seems to talk about racking off to secondary in their process, and we aren't doing that so far. I'd love to do an experimental side-by-side, but not until I get the other stuff dialed in. Maybe someone here already knows what I should expect if we started going that route?
 
You'll find very little support of indiscriminate use of a secondary on these boards (it's almost a daily topic - congrats, you covered today's quota). Most people here (I among them), will tell you that unless you have a specific reason to use a secondary (for example, adding fruit), it's best to just skip it.
 
evrose said:
You'll find very little support of indiscriminate use of a secondary on these boards (it's almost a daily topic - congrats, you covered today's quota). Most people here (I among them), will tell you that unless you have a specific reason to use a secondary (for example, adding fruit), it's best to just skip it.
Click to expand...

+1
And racking to secondary is another opportunity for contamination and/or oxidation.
 
Thanks! Sorry, realized just after I hit submit that someone else had probably discussed this.
 
The fear used to be that there would be autolysis (yeast dying and spilling their guts) if left on the yeast cake too long. It's been since shown that if the yeast being used is healthy to start with, there is very little to fear. I've heard of people leaving beer on their yeast cake for up to a year without any ill effects. The reason people say it's beneficial is that even after the beer is done fermenting, leaving the yeast in the beer will give them a chance to clean up after themselves.
 
All are good reasons. if you like the beer, I'd say it is perfect.
misterbk said:
The factors leading to our extended-primary decision were:
* Limited space for equipment
* Less effort = more fun
* Great results so far, as far as we can tell.
* Having read that this might actually be a good thing (no way I could say where my roomie saw this, at very least he heard there was interest in this process.)
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, I wouldn't worry. There is nothing wrong with using a secondary and lots of brewers do it, but unless you are leaving it on the cake for extremely long periods of time or trying to re-pitch on 10 generation yeast, I wouldn't worry.
 
I should probably recommend a secondary for my roommate then. He has a "RagnaBock" that he thought would be done for December 2012, but is still aging. It has now been on the yeast cake for almost a year and a half.
 
Wouldn't dead yeast create off flavors in the beer if it was left in the primary for a month? I always rack to a secondary...but that's more out of OCD habit than anything else. I'm very new to the hobby, so I'm just as curious as misterbk.
 
About four posts up:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/does-no-secondary-equal-shooting-yourself-foot-434602/#post5546573

Sounds like this is something that used to be more of a problem, but now people have a much better yeast supply in general, better control of temperatures and sanitation etc. So the yeast starts out healthier and we don't have to worry about dead yeasties until it's been in there for longer than people usually let it sit.

So, my roomie should have used a secondary for his ultra-long-term brew several months ago, and definitely should transfer or bottle soon. But I have nothing to fear for my two-to-six month brews.
 
mrphillips said:
Wouldn't dead yeast create off flavors in the beer if it was left in the primary for a month?
Click to expand...

Which would assume that, after consuming the fermentable sugars and normal by-products, a whole bunch of the yeast dies. Not so. Most of them simply go dormant and floc out waiting for the next meal.

My brews normally go 2-3 weeks before cold crashing (in the primary) for 5-7 days. No secondary needed. I wouldn't worry at all if I have to leave one sit on the cake for a month.
 
I have personally left beers (and apfelwein) on the yeast cake for upwards to 5-6 months and never experienced the 'meaty' yeast autolysis flavor. You will see many people saying the same thing. Yeast is far healthier now than in the past when it was transported dry, warm, and of potentially dubious origins/storage environment. Plus more is known about it.

For some good information check out this post by Revvy
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/confused-about-autolysis-382709/#post4805530

and the link he provides with more information.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/
 
I'd worry much more about temperature control than secondaries. You say that you're fermenting around 71F - that's on the high range for most yeasts. Also how certain are you that you're actually fermenting at 71? Temperature control is the key to brewing consistent and great beer. Secondaries are not.
 
My beers are usually in primary for about 3 weeks to hit FG & clean up/settle out clear or slightly misty before dry hopping &/or bottling. I've had them sit in primary 5 weeks before bottling with no ill effects.
The problem,commercially,is the sheer volume of beer in those silo-sized fermenters. The sheer weight of all that beer on the yeast & trub can cause autolysis. Not a problem with our small batches by comparison. Plus better quality yeasts nowadays.
But if you're going to age a beer,don't rack it till it's at FG & cleared up some.
Then rack it to a secondary. About the only time I do it is when I'm oaking a beer. Then you want to use a secondary the size of the batch. Iow,a 5G for 5 gallons of beer,a 6 gallon for 6 gallons of beer,etc. You need to minimalize the head space so what co2 coming out of solution can fill the small head space to protect the beer.
 
Darwin18 said:
I'd worry much more about temperature control than secondaries. You say that you're fermenting around 71F - that's on the high range for most yeasts. Also how certain are you that you're actually fermenting at 71? Temperature control is the key to brewing consistent and great beer. Secondaries are not.
Click to expand...

+1 to this. I was wondering the same thing. 71 and up is fine for some yeasts like for siasons, but most ales ferment best in the low to mid 60's. I would check the range of the yeast you used. That would have more of a flavor effect than using a secondary or not.

The more transfers of fermented beer, the greater chance of oxidation. I also agree with the less headspace the better for any fermentation. It all depends on what you want your beer to taste like, either like the grains you ordered or like the cardboard box it came in.

Oxygen before fermentation = very nice
Oxygen after fermentation = very bad
 
I for one meant that having less head space in secondary to be benificial,since the beer is done fermenting at that point & producing far less co2 to fill the head space. Thus keeping air from allowing nasties to breed. Having little head space in secondary is then a prevenatative measure. Having a gallon or a little more head space in primary is good,as more room for krausen expansion is needed. And leaving the primary lid on as much as possible keeps the co2 layer intact & nasties at bay. Nastiy bacteria,etc need air,warmth & food/moisture to propogate.
 
Long primary,.... using a secondary,..... doesn't matter, both produce good beer, but there are some subtle differences. For many folks the difference is not worth the effort to do a secondary. Many have tried both, but prefer the long primary. Others still prefer the flavor when they use a secondary (and don't mind the extra effort/risk). Try it both way and see which YOU prefer. Keep in mind the longer you leave a beer in primary the more the yeast cake influences the flavor. The higher the temp, the greater the impact too.

Lots of misconceptions out there.

Normal Autolysis DOES NOT produce meaty flavors - infections do. Autolysis is a normal part of the yeast life cycle and begins once fermentation stops (Stationary phase, after the log phase of growth) even in a 5 gal fermenter, albeit lesss than in a giant conical, but it is happening . It does not produce strong flavors. I've never had a meaty chardonnay or champagne and both of these wines often have extended contact with the yeast during their production. Dead yeast though are a great food source for other microbes and can produce some nasty flavors if they get in your beer. This is the source of the meaty off flavors, not the autolysis itself. The foulest smelling microbes, do not require oxygen and are perfectly happy in beer. If you do have extra O2 around, and an infection, you are more likely to get vinegar, as acetobacter does require O2, but lots or microbes do not

The yeast cake is NOT needed for clean up of fermentation by-products. The yeast in the cake are dormant. It is the yeast that are still in suspension that do the clean up.

A racked beer does not clear faster. In his book, Chris White says that if anything, a beer left in primary might clear a little faster. If you are concerned about siphoning yeast into your bottling bucket/keg, then maybe you might want to use a secondary. I personally don't think a little extra yeast is going to cause a problem (I'm assuming not whole bunches of yeast are being sucked up), unless one is doing it simply for the aesthetics. It might be nice if bottling though to limit the amount that settles out in the bottle so pouring pouring is easier, and less beer is left in the bottle. I don't think it will impact carbonation or flavor though at this point.
 
I've been following this thread as my first batch is 8 days in the primary. My instructions (that came with the kit) said to rack to the secondary after 5-7 days.

I pitched my yeast at 63 degrees (current temps are stable @ 70) so fermentation has been slow.

I forgot to take an OG reading but FG is supposed to be 1.012. I took a reading at 5 days and got 1.026 and again last night (8 days) and it's now 1.022.

There's a small amount of Krausen on top and the air lock is still bubbling at about 1 per 12 secs. So, from what I've read in this thread, my best option is to let it sit in the primary another week until it gets to within a couple points of FG?

It still has a way to go to hit FG and I hate this newbie impatience that I have!
 
p40whk said:
I've been following this thread as my first batch is 8 days in the primary. My instructions (that came with the kit) said to rack to the secondary after 5-7 days.

I pitched my yeast at 63 degrees (current temps are stable @ 70) so fermentation has been slow.

I forgot to take an OG reading but FG is supposed to be 1.012. I took a reading at 5 days and got 1.026 and again last night (8 days) and it's now 1.022.

There's a small amount of Krausen on top and the air lock is still bubbling at about 1 per 12 secs. So, from what I've read in this thread, my best option is to let it sit in the primary another week until it gets to within a couple points of FG?

It still has a way to go to hit FG and I hate this newbie impatience that I have!
Click to expand...

Just make sure that the SG is consistant before moving or packaging. Same reading over 3 or more days and you should be good to secondary or not (brewers choice).
 
Darwin18 said:
I'd worry much more about temperature control than secondaries. You say that you're fermenting around 71F - that's on the high range for most yeasts. Also how certain are you that you're actually fermenting at 71? Temperature control is the key to brewing consistent and great beer. Secondaries are not.
Click to expand...

Truth. If it says 70 on the outside of the fermenter, or in the room in which the ferment is taking place, it can be upwards of 6-10 degrees hotter in the middle of the liquid during an active ferment - when it's really frothy - which is just when you don't want hot temperatures in the beer!

So keep it cool. There are all manner of methods described here on HBT. Surely one of them will work for you.

unionrdr said:
I for one meant that having less head space in secondary to be benificial,since the beer is done fermenting at that point & producing far less co2 to fill the head space. Thus keeping air from allowing nasties to breed. Having little head space in secondary is then a prevenatative measure. Having a gallon or a little more head space in primary is good,as more room for krausen expansion is needed. And leaving the primary lid on as much as possible keeps the co2 layer intact & nasties at bay. Nastiy bacteria,etc need air,warmth & food/moisture to propogate.
Click to expand...

In one paragraph you've illustrated both the perceived benefit and why that perception is false. :D

If you don't screw around with it, there is no way for the carbon dioxide blanket in the primary to go away. Matter of fact, you really have to muck about with it to disturb it enough to make it not protect the beer. If it stays resident, there is no oxygen with which the beer in the primary can come into contact. Further, the act of siphoning or draining through gravity from the primary to the secondary not only guarantees a certain amount of air pickup during the transfer, it disturbs the carbon dioxide blanket - it removes it - even though some off-gassing will take place in the carboy.

Therefore, racking to secondary to reduce headspace out of fear of air in the headspace will actually guarantee air in the headspace, and is also guaranteed to introduce air. That ain't smart! ;)

I rack, but only if I want to fine or flavor. If I want/need bright beer in a hurry, I'll rack and fine for a few days before packaging. If I want flavor (fruit, dry hops, wood) I'll rack into another vessel. But that's about it.

p40whk said:
I've been following this thread as my first batch is 8 days in the primary.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the hobby! (koffkoffOBSESSIONkoffkoff) :mug:

My instructions (that came with the kit) said to rack to the secondary after 5-7 days.

I pitched my yeast at 63 degrees (current temps are stable @ 70) so fermentation has been slow.

I forgot to take an OG reading but FG is supposed to be 1.012. I took a reading at 5 days and got 1.026 and again last night (8 days) and it's now 1.022.

There's a small amount of Krausen on top and the air lock is still bubbling at about 1 per 12 secs. So, from what I've read in this thread, my best option is to let it sit in the primary another week until it gets to within a couple points of FG?

It still has a way to go to hit FG and I hate this newbie impatience that I have!
Click to expand...

This is why you'll read veteran brewers telling n00bs to ignore the post-pitching instructions: Yeast can't read. :D They don't know they're supposed to be done in 5-7 days, and you can't really yell at them; they don't understand English. They can only do what they do. YOU can only wait for them to finish what they're doing.

If you were brewing an extract batch - which I suspect you are - you needn't worry about OG; provided you put all of the malt and sugar ingredients into the beer, you will get that OG.

FG is dependent on so many different factors that the "target" FG listed in these kind of instructions is pretty much always bunk. What was your OG according to the recipe? What was the yeast used? I can attempt to show you how to estimate FG better than catch-all instructions.

Leave it alone until you hit the 2-week mark. Then take another gravity sample. Then take another the day after. Then another the day after. If they're all the same, the ferment is complete. Oh, and be sure to at least taste the gravity samples. For one, it's a sin to let beer you worked so hard to brew go to waste. ;) For another, you should learn what beer tastes like at every step in the brewing process. It's an education. :)

Cheers,

Bob
 
Bob said:
What was your OG according to the recipe? What was the yeast used? I can attempt to show you how to estimate FG better than catch-all instructions. Leave it alone until you hit the 2-week mark. Then take another gravity sample. Then take another the day after. Then another the day after. If they're all the same, the ferment is complete. Oh, and be sure to at least taste the gravity samples. For one, it's a sin to let beer you worked so hard to brew go to waste. ;) For another, you should learn what beer tastes like at every step in the brewing process. It's an education. :) Cheers, Bob
Click to expand...

Thanks Bob,

OG should have been 1.049 and FG is supposed to be 1.012 +/- 3 points

I used White labs American Hefeweizen ale yeast WL320 (no starter).

I did taste each sample and was pleasantly surprised at how well it tasted. I was also surprised at how much more body the second sample had over the first.
 
Bob said:
Truth. If it says 70 on the outside of the fermenter, or in the room in which the ferment is taking place, it can be upwards of 6-10 degrees hotter in the middle of the liquid during an active ferment - when it's really frothy - which is just when you don't want hot temperatures in the beer!

So keep it cool. There are all manner of methods described here on HBT. Surely one of them will work for you.



In one paragraph you've illustrated both the perceived benefit and why that perception is false. :D

If you don't screw around with it, there is no way for the carbon dioxide blanket in the primary to go away. Matter of fact, you really have to muck about with it to disturb it enough to make it not protect the beer. If it stays resident, there is no oxygen with which the beer in the primary can come into contact. Further, the act of siphoning or draining through gravity from the primary to the secondary not only guarantees a certain amount of air pickup during the transfer, it disturbs the carbon dioxide blanket - it removes it - even though some off-gassing will take place in the carboy.

Therefore, racking to secondary to reduce headspace out of fear of air in the headspace will actually guarantee air in the headspace, and is also guaranteed to introduce air. That ain't smart! ;)

I rack, but only if I want to fine or flavor. If I want/need bright beer in a hurry, I'll rack and fine for a few days before packaging. If I want flavor (fruit, dry hops, wood) I'll rack into another vessel. But that's about it.



Welcome to the hobby! (koffkoffOBSESSIONkoffkoff) :mug:



This is why you'll read veteran brewers telling n00bs to ignore the post-pitching instructions: Yeast can't read. :D They don't know they're supposed to be done in 5-7 days, and you can't really yell at them; they don't understand English. They can only do what they do. YOU can only wait for them to finish what they're doing.

If you were brewing an extract batch - which I suspect you are - you needn't worry about OG; provided you put all of the malt and sugar ingredients into the beer, you will get that OG.

FG is dependent on so many different factors that the "target" FG listed in these kind of instructions is pretty much always bunk. What was your OG according to the recipe? What was the yeast used? I can attempt to show you how to estimate FG better than catch-all instructions.

Leave it alone until you hit the 2-week mark. Then take another gravity sample. Then take another the day after. Then another the day after. If they're all the same, the ferment is complete. Oh, and be sure to at least taste the gravity samples. For one, it's a sin to let beer you worked so hard to brew go to waste. ;) For another, you should learn what beer tastes like at every step in the brewing process. It's an education. :)

Cheers,

Bob
Click to expand...

Racking to just reduce head space is NOT the reason for doing so. If you're going to age it,or maybe oak it,getting it off the yeast cake so it doesn't interfear somehow is the reason. But having a smaller head space in secondary since no more co2 is being produced is the primary reason. Since no more co2 is being produced,you want a smaller head space to make it easier for what little co2 is off gassed to fill that smaller head space.It's commonly discussed/advized on here,so get your logic straight.
It's also not neccessary to take gravity samples every single day for 3 days straight to be sure it's done. At that point,the ferment is quite slow compared to initial fermentation. So it'll take a couple days to knock off the last point or two. Take a reading,wait till the third day & take another. If the numbers match,it's done. Simple.
 
Thanks! That gives me much more to work with.

White Labs WL320 lists an attenuation range of 70-75%. That puts your finishing gravity potential somewhere between 1.015 and 1.012. ("=/- 3 points", not so much ;) )

An important thing to note is that yeast manufacturers determine their attenuation predictions in a lab setting, which is what our ferments are decidedly not. The unique nature of how your brewery works means that you might finish higher than the upper range of that prediction.

Another important thing to note is that such attenuation figures assume a proper pitch - that is, a sufficient number of fresh, viable cells inoculated into the wort. One vial (or smack pack) is rarely if ever sufficient to pitch into 19-20 liters of wort, unless the sample is mere days from the yeast lab, kept in optimum conditions, and pitched to a wort of 1.040 or less. Underpitching can lead to less attenuation.

Now that the lecture is out of the way, let's get to practicality. None of that means anything.

Yes, that's what I said.

Because at the end of the day, three consecutive daily gravity readings will tell you if the ferment is complete. Not attenuation predictions, not beer-kit instruction sheets, none of it is any replacement for taking three consecutive gravity readings and determining that they are the same. If your beer is sitting at 1.018 three days in a row, the yeast are done. Remember where I said they can't read? :p

Now, there are a few more advanced methods to encourage your yeasties to work overtime. But in your case, the solution is a few more days of patience, then using your hydrometer.

You dig?

Bob

EDITED TO ADD: Brewing from extract means you can't really miss a predicted OG, so long as you're putting all the kit ingredients in there. If you forget to put in a pound of extract, well, that's a problem. But you can't go much higher - maybe a point or two, depending on what type of extract - but you can be lower. But that's only if you forget to add something.
 
unionrdr said:
Racking to just reduce head space is NOT the reason for doing so. If you're going to age it,or maybe oak it,getting it off the yeast cake so it doesn't interfear somehow is the reason. But having a smaller head space in secondary since no more co2 is being produced is the primary reason. Since no more co2 is being produced,you want a smaller head space to make it easier for what little co2 is off gassed to fill that smaller head space.It's commonly discussed/advized on here,so get your logic straight.
Click to expand...

My logic, sir, is eminently straight. Let me state it again in a different way:

Yes, the headspace is smaller. However, if you leave it alone (in the primary), the CO2 blanket will not be disturbed. If the blanket is not disturbed, the amount of headspace is perfectly irrelevant.

When you rack to secondary, you deliberately remove the blanket in hopes that off-gassing will produce enough CO2 to displace the air in the admittedly smaller headspace. I put it to you that this, sir, is illogical.

That a thing is advised by no means makes it sound advice. ;)

At the same time, racking in order to introduce other flavoring ingredients makes a lot of sense. In that case, it is wise to displace the air in the sanitized secondary with CO2 in order to minimize oxygen pickup.

Why are these things true (blanket and displacement)? Because CO2 is heavier than air. To get the CO2 out of your primary bucket you have to do a LOT of work. Waving your hands over the bucket, removing the lid, dipping a turkey baster to get a gravity sample, none of these are sufficient to remove the blanket of heavier-than-air gas.

It's also not neccessary to take gravity samples every single day for 3 days straight to be sure it's done. At that point,the ferment is quite slow compared to initial fermentation. So it'll take a couple days to knock off the last point or two. Take a reading,wait till the third day & take another. If the numbers match,it's done. Simple.
Click to expand...

This method will also work. However, it costs nothing to ensure completion with a third reading. As the beer should optimally rest for several days after attenuation is complete, there's no need to rush.
 
Bob said:
My logic, sir, is eminently straight. Let me state it again in a different way:

Yes, the headspace is smaller. However, if you leave it alone (in the primary), the CO2 blanket will not be disturbed. If the blanket is not disturbed, the amount of headspace is perfectly irrelevant.

When you rack to secondary, you deliberately remove the blanket in hopes that off-gassing will produce enough CO2 to displace the air in the admittedly smaller headspace. I put it to you that this, sir, is illogical.

That a thing is advised by no means makes it sound advice. ;)

At the same time, racking in order to introduce other flavoring ingredients makes a lot of sense. In that case, it is wise to displace the air in the sanitized secondary with CO2 in order to minimize oxygen pickup.

Why are these things true (blanket and displacement)? Because CO2 is heavier than air. To get the CO2 out of your primary bucket you have to do a LOT of work. Waving your hands over the bucket, removing the lid, dipping a turkey baster to get a gravity sample, none of these are sufficient to remove the blanket of heavier-than-air gas.



This method will also work. However, it costs nothing to ensure completion with a third reading. As the beer should optimally rest for several days after attenuation is complete, there's no need to rush.
Click to expand...

You've def got it backwards in regard to head space volume post racking. You're def in the minority on that one. Why do you think there are so many infected secondarys on here? (besides primary ones,that's another chapter) Take note of the large head space. Traditionally,the secondary vessel size should match the volume of the batch. So a 5 gallon secondary is proper for a 5 gallon batch. That leaves the surface of the beer at the base of the neck or therabouts. See what I mean? Air,food & moisture feed nasties,it's that simple. The more air & the more head space after racking,the more likely it is to get infected to whatever degree. So by keeping secondary head space to a minimum,you reduce the chance that the dissolved co2 from fermentation won't be enought build that protective blanket again as in primary. I rarely use a secondary myself,for the reasons you mentioned that we all basically agree on.
As for primary,I agree. I wasn't discussing that point. Yes,co2 is heavier than o2,but not that much heavier. It's still just a gas after all. And co2 in the head space will absorbe the o2 as the co2 is being produced. They don't layer,as many of us used to think till this research scientist brewer fella came on here during one of these discussions.:mug:
 
They don't need to layer in a primary. In a standard primary fermentor, under airlock, there is nothing but CO2 in the headspace post fermentation. Over a long period of time, yes, oxygen will ingress and mix, that's true. But I think you're underestimating how much oxygen exposure a beer gets during the racking process. It's much more than letting something sit with a large headspace full of CO2. I hear what you're saying about offgassing in the secondary, once the airlock is in place, but by the time you get to that point, the damage has already been done (and continues a bit faster than you'd think, I imagine).

I'll point out as well that Bob's a smart and knowledgeable fellow, and I wouldn't be too quick to discount what he's saying. Give it a bit more thought.

At any rate, secondary or not, as long as you follow standard recommended practices for each, it takes a long time for oxidation to become an issue worth worrying about.
 
It doesn't take a really long time to oxidize a beer as you might think. It takes a couple weeks in my experiences. o2 is like Kiff...a little warms,a lot burns. That's experience,not opinion. I was also referring to the begining when the yeast is first ptched & when reproduction is completing. or if there's a problem with a bad pitch,things can go south in a week or so. I've been fermenting stuff for 42 years,& these are my collective experiences on the subject. Not to be a ****** or troll or whatever. But saying I'm completely wrong & illogical is the falsehood here. What we're dealing with here are subtlties,not 100% absolutes. And a secondary with a large head space & little dissolved co2 to fill it can be trouble,even at that point.I can't sit here & give you the exact science of it like this research guy can,but I know & understand the process. And it's not like someone doesn't always come along lookin for a gunfight at the HBT corral...:D
 
I think you two are saying the same thing:

If you are afraid of introducing oxygen, don't secondary. The gains of a small headspace are not worth the movement and loss of protective CO2 layer. If (IF!) you plan on a secondary FOR A DIFFERENT REASON, use a secondary that is properly sized so as to minimize headspace.

Do either of you disagree? If not, let's answer OP's questions and move on.
 
unionrdr said:
You've def got it backwards in regard to head space volume post racking.
Click to expand...

Um...

[looks around]

I'm not talking about head space volume.

What I'm talking about is racking AT ALL. When you rack, you guarantee exposure to oxygen and infection and and and. I'm saying if you're racking solely to reduce headspace, you're doing something out of unfounded fear which is guaranteed to introduce the thing you're trying to avoid.

By any standard, that's just dumb.

I think maybe we're arguing at cross-purposes. ;)

Bob

EDITED TO ADD:

freisste said:
I think you two are saying the same thing:

If you are afraid of introducing oxygen, don't secondary. The gains of a small headspace are not worth the movement and loss of protective CO2 layer. If (IF!) you plan on a secondary FOR A DIFFERENT REASON, use a secondary that is properly sized so as to minimize headspace.

Do either of you disagree? If not, let's answer OP's questions and move on.
Click to expand...

I guess we were arguing at cross purposes.

Sheesh, sometimes I'm dim. :p
 
freisste said:
I think you two are saying the same thing:

If you are afraid of introducing oxygen, don't secondary. The gains of a small headspace are not worth the movement and loss of protective CO2 layer. If (IF!) you plan on a secondary FOR A DIFFERENT REASON, use a secondary that is properly sized so as to minimize headspace.

Do either of you disagree? If not, let's answer OP's questions and move on.
Click to expand...

In the context of a typical homebrewing setup and procedure, I agree with this. What we were discussing were the problems, or problems solved, involved in racking to a secondary (which was a big part of the OP's original question). Strictly speaking, head space volume is irrelevant, it's oxygen that's the enemy. Minimizing head space is one method of attempting to avoid oxygen exposure, but it shouldn't be viewed as something intrinsically good. There are other and better ways of achieving this goal, which homebrewers typically do not choose to use for a variety of reasons.

If we want to get back to the thrust of OP's question, I think the differences, in most cases, between racking/no racking will not be as great as differences that appear with other changes already mentioned (fermentation temps, pitch rates, mash pH, etc.).
 
Bob said:
I guess we were arguing at cross purposes.

Sheesh, sometimes I'm dim. :p
Click to expand...

You're not the only one. I think there was a good amount of hand waving at arguments and such that was plenty easy to misunderstand.

It's all good, everyone. Yes, we can all just get along. :mug:
 
Bob said:
Um...

[looks around]

I'm not talking about head space volume.

What I'm talking about is racking AT ALL. When you rack, you guarantee exposure to oxygen and infection and and and. I'm saying if you're racking solely to reduce head space, you're doing something out of unfounded fear which is guaranteed to introduce the thing you're trying to avoid.

By any standard, that's just dumb.

I think maybe we're arguing at cross-purposes. ;)

Bob

EDITED TO ADD:



I guess we were arguing at cross purposes.

Sheesh, sometimes I'm dim. :p
Click to expand...

GuldTuborg said:
In the context of a typical home brewing setup and procedure, I agree with this. What we were discussing were the problems, or problems solved, involved in racking to a secondary (which was a big part of the OP's original question). Strictly speaking, head space volume is irrelevant, it's oxygen that's the enemy. Minimizing head space is one method of attempting to avoid oxygen exposure, but it shouldn't be viewed as something intrinsically good. There are other and better ways of achieving this goal, which homebrewers typically do not choose to use for a variety of reasons.

If we want to get back to the thrust of OP's question, I think the differences, in most cases, between racking/no racking will not be as great as differences that appear with other changes already mentioned (fermentation temps, pitch rates, mash pH, etc.).
Click to expand...

GuldTuborg said:
You're not the only one. I think there was a good amount of hand waving at arguments and such that was plenty easy to misunderstand.

It's all good, everyone. Yes, we can all just get along. :mug:
Click to expand...

We have a winner! whadda we have for'em Johnny??:D
You basically misunderstood what I was referring to. Racking when it isn't needed is a waste of time to me,gives more to sanitize,clean,sanitize again. Plus the problem of whether you'll get enough co2 out of solution to fill the head space enough not to worry while aging. And co2 systems for that costs money. I use the "single stage" system as described in BS2 for those wanting further info. Always did it that way. That's where we got caught in the cross-fire. (Stevie Ray RULES!). A little sabre rattling fer sher.
AAAAAAnyway...a healthy yeast pitch,keeping ferment temps within the particular yeasts' range,mash/steep temps & the like will go further in preventing off flavors & yield beer that,even tasting the FG sample,will be great. I just did that monday with the IPA that pegged the airlock in 15 minutes. Even the aroma was great,& wasn't dry hopped yet.
 
I left a beer on the lees for a year and had no issues. As long as the fermenter is stored at cellar temperatures autolysis should not be an issue.

I really wish whoever ages ago coined the term "secondary" had just picked abtter term, like clarifying vessel; because that is exactly what a secondary is.

The term "secondary fermenter" lead to the the term "Secondary fermentation", which is an oft propagated fallacious use of terminology.
 
Denny's Evil Concoctions said:
I really wish whoever ages ago coined the term "secondary" had just picked abtter term, like clarifying vessel; because that is exactly what a secondary is.
Click to expand...

You mean like "brite tank?" :p

If I had to guess, there was a time when beer was more commonly racked prior to the end of fermentation, with the idea that the fermentation continues in the secondary vessel. It's still fairly common practice to remove wine from the gross lees before fermentation has completed. Is it possible homebrewing followed some in this pattern, either by inspiration, default, necessity given the materials at the time, or something similar? I don't know, but I'd love to hear if anyone knows of the reasons for all of this.
 
GuldTuborg said:
You mean like "brite tank?" :p

If I had to guess, there was a time when beer was more commonly racked prior to the end of fermentation, with the idea that the fermentation continues in the secondary vessel. It's still fairly common practice to remove wine from the gross lees before fermentation has completed. Is it possible homebrewing followed some in this pattern, either by inspiration, default, necessity given the materials at the time, or something similar? I don't know, but I'd love to hear if anyone knows of the reasons for all of this.
Click to expand...

Even so, there is/was no "secondary" fermentation.

And yeah, Bright tank. Common term in beer and wine industry. Though usually in brewing it's also a chilled tank. You don't really hear the term "secondary" used in professional brewing/wine making.
 
Bright tank is about the most descriptive term I can think of atm. And the secondary,or two vessel system was common in earlier days because of the fear of autolysis. Now we have better yeasts than I remember using on wines a long time ago. So the autolysis boogieman is a thing of the past on our scale of brewing. Commercial brewers still have to be concerned,since their giant fermenters exert a lot of pressure by weight on the trub & settled yeast that can still cause autolysis on such huge systems.
 

Similar threads

CarolusMag
Secondary fermentation needed?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Kickass
K
SFC Rudy
Secondary Fermentation Yes, no or maybe?
Replies
10
Views
378
hottpeper13
H
AlcheMania
Pressure cooker: A decoction hack?
2 3
Replies
85
Views
4K
MicroMickey
MicroMickey
pacostagli
Simple Question - When to move into Secondary?
Replies
27
Views
3K
pacostagli
pacostagli
Gadjobrinus
1469, 11 plato - on lees for a couple weeks?
Replies
3
Views
402
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus

Latest posts

Back
Top