1st timer question...

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.
R

Rdracera1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
Location
Desert Southwest aka - Hell
What sort of percolation rate should I see in my airlock. I pitched my ale yeast ~ 10 hours ago. Pitched at 80 degrees and current temp is a steady 70. Percs are about 40 seconds apart.

Since this is my first attempt at home brewing I have no idea what to expect.

Thx
:mug:
 
Good luck with the first batch !
But don't worry about the rate...as HB_99 says, if its going, its going!
There are tons of factors temperature, yeast type/quality, the size/type of the
fermentation lock/bung, the tighness of the seal..ect,e ct. All these factors
boil down to there not being any sort of percualtion rate to measure/compare.
Usually the first 3 days are really active- and yours sounds good.

Cheers.
 
Air bubbles are hypnotic......you are making beer....you are making beer.......
 
Thanks for the info.

The root of my question stems from passage I read. Something to the effect of .....
after several days measure the frequency of the burps in your airlock. If they're more than a minute apart your ready to move on.

So, that's why I was asking what the 'beginning' frequency should be. If the ending frequency is supposed to be something like a burp every 65 - 90 seconds.


I'll post how the batch turns out once it's finished. Provided I don't spit it all over the keyboard and short something out. :D
 
You don't really have to obsess over how often the bubbles come out of the air lock. Let is sit in the primary for a week (if you plan on using a secondary) or two (if you are going straight to bottle) and you will be fine. I think people come up with stuff like bubble rate observation requirements to make this stuff sound a lot harder and more scientific and precise than it has to be just to scare off the new brewers! :D
 
The agreed upon rule of thumb for a "standard" (non high-gravity) ale is:

1 week in Primary
2 weeks in secondary
3 weeks in the bottle.

You can double those times if you feel like it, but don't subtract from them. The beer will not tell you when its done because it's never truly "done". The yeast will keep eating the sugar and settling to the bottom. You have to decide when they've done a "good enough" job, and that follows the guidelines above. Too much more time in the primary can eventually deteriorate the flavor of your beer.

Now, the longer it sits in the bottle, the better it will be (given a stable environment in the sub 75ºF range). If you make a beer with a lot of hops or specialty grains, spices or fruits, you'll want to let it sit for 3+ months in the bottle.

The first one is hard to be patient with. It's almost worth being impatient and ruining it just to learn the lesson.
 
SteveM said:
You don't really have to obsess over how often the bubbles come out of the air lock. Let is sit in the primary for a week (if you plan on using a secondary) or two (if you are going straight to bottle) and you will be fine. I think people come up with stuff like bubble rate observation requirements to make this stuff sound a lot harder and more scientific and precise than it has to be just to scare off the new brewers! :D
Click to expand...
What gets me is a lot of brewers who count bubbles and use the 1-2-3 method will be the first ones to tell you a hydrometer is an evil tool that you should not use!;) Well, for me it sure take ALL guesswork out of the equation. When I know what my gravites are for a particular style and I can stay within the range I know my beer will be good and I am successful.

Contrary to many beliefs, brewing is a science and every batch is an experiment. The trick is to repeat the experiment every time. If making good beer is not your purpose for brewing then you're just wasting time and money.

Oops, my foot just fell through my soapbox...:drunk: I didn't spiill a drop...:D
 
It is much less of a science for me than an art. There are few pieces of conventional wisom that I always follow to the letter. For example, I don't sweat the bubble counting, I don't use a hydrometer, I don't worry if I crack one open after only a week in the bottle (though I know they will get better over time), I don't feel compelled to use a secondary for every batch. And yet, somehow I make good beer (at least by my own standards, by which I mean "way better than anything I can buy"). My only hard and fast rules are maniacal sanitizing and letting the yeast work undisturbed.

My only point is that you do what works for you and be wary of people who say there are hard and fast rules. There are few absolutes in this hobby.
 
SteveM said:
It is much less of a science for me than an art. There are few pieces of conventional wisom that I always follow to the letter. For example, I don't sweat the bubble counting, I don't use a hydrometer, I don't worry if I crack one open after only a week in the bottle (though I know they will get better over time), I don't feel compelled to use a secondary for every batch. And yet, somehow I make good beer (at least by my own standards, by which I mean "way better than anything I can buy"). My only hard and fast rules are maniacal sanitizing and letting the yeast work undisturbed.

My only point is that you do what works for you and be wary of people who say there are hard and fast rules. There are few absolutes in this hobby.
Click to expand...
I can agree with most of what you say except when it comes to trying to produce a clone. The more rules (directions, recipes) you follow the better your product should be.:D
 
I agree. Although I have no interest in clones, I do understand the impulse to produce them, especially if you have a strong preference for something that is not available where you are located.

My approach is much more intuitive than scientific. There should be room for anything from great rigor to a highly intuitive approach on these boards, and I am mildly concerned that lately, in the past month or two, I have seen an awful lot of posts that appear (to me at least) to be pretty dogmatic in statements of absolutes: "You should always..." "You must never..." Almost every rule stated as an absolute has exceptions. This perceived trend, incidentally, is what prompted me to make this post:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=9840

If I had gotten some of the stern advice I am seeing lately when I first started brewing, I might have decided that it was not a hobby for me. The thing is, there is room for people who take both approaches, or something in between, and we all make better beers than what you can buy.
 
SteveM said:
I agree. Although I have no interest in clones, I do understand the impulse to produce them, especially if you have a strong preference for something that is not available where you are located.

My approach is much more intuitive than scientific. There should be room for anything from great rigor to a highly intuitive approach on these boards, and I am mildly concerned that lately, in the past month or two, I have seen an awful lot of posts that appear (to me at least) to be pretty dogmatic in statements of absolutes: "You should always..." "You must never..." Almost every rule stated as an absolute has exceptions. This perceived trend, incidentally, is what prompted me to make this post:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=9840

If I had gotten some of the stern advice I am seeing lately when I first started brewing, I might have decided that it was not a hobby for me. The thing is, there is room for people who take both approaches, or something in between, and we all make better beers than what you can buy.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, but most of that insight comes from experience. I think we are just trying to help those less experienced with our knowledge and trying to keep them from making mistakes.:D
 
Ahhhhh, put the porter into secondary today and it's right on schedule. OG = 1.050, 1.018 today with a target of 1.010 - .012 by next week. Taste is very yummy though obviously flat. I'm pleasantly surprised at how good it is given this is my 1st attempt.

As usual thanks for all your input! 18 days and counting until the first bottle gets cracked.

:tank:
 
If you're not doing a secondary, what's the longest a brew should sit in the primary? I read that the yeast start to lyse in about 10 days, but some others say give it 2 weeks... Is this safe?
 
I left my first batch in the primary for 2 weeks & went right to the keg. I've heard not to keep it in the primary longer than 3 weeks.
 
Most people will tell you not to keep it in the primary for more than three weeks max, but those are usually the people that go straight to bottle from there.

It's been my experience that you only leave it in the primary until the major fermentation is complete (i.e. somewhere is the ballpark of one bubble a minute) then rack to the secondary. I have always followed this and have always(almost always) had excellent beers, with superb clarity. It will still ferment in the secondary a few points, but the main reason I rack is to "finish" the beer, to allow it to settle a bit more, and to free up my primary for my next batch.


So the stripped down answer is, it will be fine up to three weeks in the primary according to most people, but I prefer to rack it when it finishes the main fermenting from primary to secondary.
 

Similar threads

A
Question about Lalvin 71b yeast
Replies
2
Views
142
Autumnridgewine
A
S
Anyone ever get a stuck fermentation with WLP300?
Replies
12
Views
448
jdauria
jdauria
A
Help with Lalvin 71b yeast
Replies
1
Views
175
D the Catastrophist
D the Catastrophist
hilljack13
Another yeast pitch rate question
Replies
35
Views
832
ncbrewer
N
Clint Yeastwood
How Long to Wait Before Repitching Slow Start?
Replies
9
Views
661
Clint Yeastwood
Clint Yeastwood
Williams Brewing 300

Latest posts

Back
Top