Spawn from another thread..leave brew in primary, or rack once before bottling??

Brewer's Friend 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.
F

Fanoffermentation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Location
Dayton
An unrelated thread led to this discussion with another member....what are the pros/cons to leaving the brew in your primary for the duration until you move to bottling bucket? Basically, when/why would you or would you not do this??? I suppose this could in part be a matter of personal preference as well, but I would love to hear from some of the more experienced brewers here. Thanks again all!
 
The main reason I would ever rack to a secondary is if the brew turned out overly-clouded, in which case I'd rack & pop it in a cool place (or the kegerator I recently purchased & cold crash it to my heart's content...woohoo!). This isn't the case with me normally, because I bottle directly from my bottling bucket which is my only other fermenting vessel.
 
The benefits of having long primary fermentations are that it gives the yeast a chance to clean up all of the byproducts of fermentation. So long as you have pitched a healthy amount of yeast and are not leaving them in an 80 degree environment, your chance of autolysis is virtually nill. The beer will clear if you leave it in primary long enough. However, if you have a limited number of primary vessels, some people secondary for the opportunity to open up a primary vessel, not for any other reason. This I feel is counterproductive. My reason for that is that they could always just use whatever they were going to use as a secondary vessel as another primary vessel and if you take the beer off the yeast too soon, you run the risk of having an incompletely "cleaned up" beer, with byproducts like diacetyl (yes, even with ale yeasts). I learned the hard way that taking the beer off the cake after a week leads to sub-optimal beer. I have NEVER been disappointed in the beers I left in the primary for 4+ weeks.

I currently have a Belgian Tripel that is has been on the cake for 8 weeks. The last 4 weeks have been with Jim Beam soaked oak in the beer, still on the cake. This beer tastes amazing based on the last gravity sample I took last week. I will be kegging that beer tomorrow when I get out of work.

Bottom line: Revvy is very right about leaving beers in primary. This took me a long time to learn, and I wish that I had learned it sooner. Patience is a good thing to learn in brewing. I hope that others can benefit from my previous mistakes and what I've learned to be true in brewing. Patience, patience, patience.
 
I think you're talking about me... :D

I racked my first two batches because I trusted that the people at the LHBS actually KNEW what they were talking about... Then I found HBT... :rockin:

Since then, and batch #3, I've been using the long primary, no secondary method. Sure, I'll rack to AGE on something when it makes sense. But, the brew will still be in primary for X weeks (typically 4-8 weeks) first. Since I adopted this method, my brews have been super clear and tasted great. Even the ones that I aged on other flavor elements have been great (typically bigger brews).

I have a barley wine recipe that I'm working on that will be in primary for at least 2 months, if not 3+... I might even add oak cubes into primary, once the brew is ready. I won't be reusing the cubes, so I'm not concerned there. I'm planning on re-brewing some of my other big brews soon (in time to enjoy this fall/winter/spring) that will sit in primary for 8+ weeks.

IMO, give your yeast friends time to do their magic, and then do their second (and possibly third) jobs as well. If you give them the right conditions to work, you'll be richly rewarded.

BTW, everyone that tries one of my brews has nothing but good things to say. This is both 'regular' people as well as home brewers (that I've not met, but the brew gets to the via a friend)...

We take care to formulate our brews, spend the time to brew them (more so with all grain), pick each ingredient with love and care, doesn't it make sense to not rush things along once you put the airlock in? Seems pretty basic to me... I can't be alone in my thought process here...

I have some suggestions for fellow home brewers, especially those new to the lifestyle...
1. Get more primaries. Get at least two, so that you can have one batch in process and brew another. If you want to brew again before the older batch is really ready, get another primary. Right now I have four dedicated primaries, with five that could be used in a pinch (for ~5 gallon batches). I'm always looking for more.
2. Get the new Yeast book by Chris White and Jamil Zainasheff. It's chock full of knowledge that I wish I had known about earlier.
3. Time heals most brews. There's very little that more time won't fix when it comes to what we brew. Sure, there are some things that can happen that will completely F up your batch, and cannot be overcome, but those are very few. Usually self inflicted at that.
4. Learn more about 'off flavors' and what they mean.
5. If your batch tastes 'yeasty' and it's only a few weeks in primary, leave it there. I know it goes against what you might think, but leaving it on the yeast, in primary, will get rid of that yeast flavor faster than racking it.
6. Every time you rack your brew, unless you're doing it in a closed system with CO2, you open yourself up to contamination. Not saying it will happen every time, or you'll ever have it happen, but the risk is increased with every time you open the fermenter/vessel.

Above all else, have fun brewing, brew what you enjoy drinking (or brew for others what they enjoy), experiment with recipes, and RDWHAHB!
 
Unless you are doing something special with your beer like adding fruit or something, there really isn't need to rack to a secondary. As the previous poster said, every time you crack that baby, you are inviting in unwanted guests. Give it about 3 weeks in primary (for ales) then bottle. No need to secondary. Rather, take that secondary, and start calling it a primary for more batches. :mug:
 
For reference, I've done long primaries, no secondary, for 15 of 17 brews... Every one of those 15 was excellent. The first two were good, but I can only imagine how great they would have been if I had let them go long enough.

The science behind long primaries being a good thing is gone over in the Yeast book... I'll look up that section an see about typing it up and then posting it... Since I have brew related tasks to do tonight, it might be a few days... Especially since I'll need to 'sample' from the three kegs in the fridge that are about to get tapped... :rockin:
 
Golddiggie said:
I think you're talking about me... :D

I racked my first two batches because I trusted that the people at the LHBS actually KNEW what they were talking about... Then I found HBT... :rockin:

Since then, and batch #3, I've been using the long primary, no secondary method. Sure, I'll rack to AGE on something when it makes sense. But, the brew will still be in primary for X weeks (typically 4-8 weeks) first. Since I adopted this method, my brews have been super clear and tasted great. Even the ones that I aged on other flavor elements have been great (typically bigger brews).

I have a barley wine recipe that I'm working on that will be in primary for at least 2 months, if not 3+... I might even add oak cubes into primary, once the brew is ready. I won't be reusing the cubes, so I'm not concerned there. I'm planning on re-brewing some of my other big brews soon (in time to enjoy this fall/winter/spring) that will sit in primary for 8+ weeks.

IMO, give your yeast friends time to do their magic, and then do their second (and possibly third) jobs as well. If you give them the right conditions to work, you'll be richly rewarded.

BTW, everyone that tries one of my brews has nothing but good things to say. This is both 'regular' people as well as home brewers (that I've not met, but the brew gets to the via a friend)...

We take care to formulate our brews, spend the time to brew them (more so with all grain), pick each ingredient with love and care, doesn't it make sense to not rush things along once you put the airlock in? Seems pretty basic to me... I can't be alone in my thought process here...

I have some suggestions for fellow home brewers, especially those new to the lifestyle...
1. Get more primaries. Get at least two, so that you can have one batch in process and brew another. If you want to brew again before the older batch is really ready, get another primary. Right now I have four dedicated primaries, with five that could be used in a pinch (for ~5 gallon batches). I'm always looking for more.
2. Get the new Yeast book by Chris White and Jamil Zainasheff. It's chock full of knowledge that I wish I had known about earlier.
3. Time heals most brews. There's very little that more time won't fix when it comes to what we brew. Sure, there are some things that can happen that will completely F up your batch, and cannot be overcome, but those are very few. Usually self inflicted at that.
4. Learn more about 'off flavors' and what they mean.
5. If your batch tastes 'yeasty' and it's only a few weeks in primary, leave it there. I know it goes against what you might think, but leaving it on the yeast, in primary, will get rid of that yeast flavor faster than racking it.
6. Every time you rack your brew, unless you're doing it in a closed system with CO2, you open yourself up to contamination. Not saying it will happen every time, or you'll ever have it happen, but the risk is increased with every time you open the fermenter/vessel.

Above all else, have fun brewing, brew what you enjoy drinking (or brew for others what they enjoy), experiment with recipes, and RDWHAHB!
Click to expand...

Great post. I second the yeast book. It has alot of very useful information.
 
No secondary means:

- less chance of oxidizing.
- allows yeast in primary to clean itself and off flavours up
- time saved to brew something else

B
 
Why do the kit recipes recommend using a two tank system?

Even Palmer's book How To Brew advises this technique for home brewers.

I was told that using this approach will give a crisper tasting beer.

I have only done 3 batches so I know very little.
 
20000Barrels, probably because the recipes were written when that was true, or thought to be true. Things have changed over the decades.

I find that my brews are much smoother with longer primaries. I actually just had some of my mocha porter that sat in primary for 7 weeks before being kegged and bottled up. I poured the partial bottle (the last to get bottled) and it was unreal. I got the flavors I was going after, with the smoothness I wanted... Great head retention and aroma too. You get a faint mocha aroma from the brew, which just enhances the flavor...

I need to get that keg tapped tomorrow. Then I can pour a glass whenever I want (until it gets kicked)... Already formulating a re-brew of the recipe (a few tweaks for the next time)...
 
So much valuable input. Thanks to Golddiggie for leading me down this line of thought in another thread. I'm sure that a lot of people new to the craft will benefit from this.
 
Fanoffermentation said:
So much valuable input. Thanks to Golddiggie for leading me down this line of thought in another thread. I'm sure that a lot of people new to the craft will benefit from this.
Click to expand...

It is why I often respond to threads on HBT that question short vs long primary and such. Better beer by all makes the world a better place!

B
 
I'm a first time brewer and have been reading all about primary vs secondary and this thread seems to sum it all up nicely. I bought a kit that had a bucket primary and 5gal glass carboy for secondary. Before reading so much, I racked into the secondary after 6 days in primary (as the instructions suggested). Being a plastic bucket I thought it made sense to put it into glass to avoid oxidization.

Based on all the experienced people here, for future brews I'm going to leave it in primary the whole time. My question now is, what is the best fermenting vessel? I'm thinking of picking up a 6.5gal glass carboy for the next batch. Would the 5gal ones work ok with just an airlock or would I need a blowoff tube?
 
birvine said:
No secondary means:

- less chance of oxidizing.
- allows yeast in primary to clean itself and off flavours up
- time saved to brew something else

B
Click to expand...

While this is very true, yeast will still "clean itself and off flavours up" when transferred to a secondary.

I have used secondary's and used long primary's. I can not say one methods makes better tasting beer.

While some disagree, I personally use secondary's. After fermentation is complete (confirm w hydrometer reading) I like to get my beer off the yeast cake & trub.
 
Mpavlik22 said:
While this is very true, yeast will still "clean itself and off flavours up" when transferred to a secondary.

I have used secondary's and used long primary's. I can not say one methods makes better tasting beer.

While some disagree, I personally use secondary's. After fermentation is complete (confirm w hydrometer reading) I like to get my beer off the yeast cake & trub.
Click to expand...

Yes the yeast will clean up to a limited degree but you are decreasing the number of available and active cells by many hundreds of percent. Thus more work for fewer cells= stressed yeast. You don't intentionally under pitch, so why reduce your capacity for clean up?
 
Heidenweizen said:
Based on all the experienced people here, for future brews I'm going to leave it in primary the whole time. My question now is, what is the best fermenting vessel? I'm thinking of picking up a 6.5gal glass carboy for the next batch. Would the 5gal ones work ok with just an airlock or would I need a blowoff tube?
Click to expand...

Either vessel - you'll find preferences for both here. I like a glass carboy myself.

Either way, I would suggest a blowoff tube just to avoid the chance of a HUGE mess.

B
 
And you will only need the blow off tube for a week or so, then let it sit with an airlock for the remainder.
 
1Mainebrew said:
Yes the yeast will clean up to a limited degree but you are decreasing the number of available and active cells by many hundreds of percent. Thus more work for fewer cells= stressed yeast. You don't intentionally under pitch, so why reduce your capacity for clean up?
Click to expand...

I actually believe racking to a secondary will still provide you with more than plenty of yeast to "clean up" the flavor. The yeast in hibernation or that have died have already flocculated to the bottom of the primary. I believe the yeast that are cleaning or conditioning your beer are still in suspension and therefore would b transferred to your secondary.

Plus I usually don't rack to a secondary until around 7-14 days depending, and all off flavors should b pretty much gone by then.

I like to see what the professionals do. Micro & large breweries use one vessel to ferment & condition. Usually a conical fermenter. They always remove the yeast immediately after fermentation is complete. Yes it is alot easier with a conical, but I believe there are added benefits to getting beer off the dead/hibernating yeast.
 
osagedr said:
Great question! I can't believe nobody ever thought to ask this before.
Click to expand...

Lol! Agreed it is a great question, but since joining HBT over a year ago every second thread is about this exact topic :) You must be veiling your sarcasm :p No offense intended, I just think its funny

On topic, I really love this forum for teaching me many things - NOT racking to a secondary unless it is absolutely needed being one of the most important lessons.
 
I see both sides of the argument, but one point to make, there's yeast left over to bottle-condition, so there's going to be yeast in the secondary.
 
It's not so much the yeast that matters here. Its the fact that your exposing it to oxygen and other nasties with out it being necessary. Don't want as much trub etc in your beer? Then run the wort through a filter before pitching your yeast. This will greatly reduce the crap in there. Id rather keep the outside exposure down to a minimum before bottling. Hell, the best idea is to forget you even brewed and come back to it a few weeks later. The less you play with it, the better off your beer is. My 2 cents.
 
Ok, well I guess the question now.....how do you determine when this long primary is done? I'm sure by 2-3wks or so you will have a consistent gravity, right? So is it a visual thing then(noticing when all the mess has made it's way back down) or what?
 
3 weeks tends to be a decent number. You base it on how big the beer is really. You got something with a high OG, you need to let it sit longer than other. 1.050ish is going to be about 3 weeks. You can get away with less but you will need to modify your hop utilization etc to account for it.
Its like this:
[--------------------] - primary time
^.......................^
Low og..............High OG
Less time............Long time

:fro:
 
Mpavlik22 said:
I actually believe racking to a secondary will still provide you with more than plenty of yeast to "clean up" the flavor. The yeast in hibernation or that have died have already flocculated to the bottom of the primary. I believe the yeast that are cleaning or conditioning your beer are still in suspension and therefore would b transferred to your secondary. /QUOTE]

This was my thought as well. You're racking off the trub and yeast in suspension are being transferred into secondary. Wouldn't yeast that flocculated to the bottom be useless?

Can anybody point to an actual source that shows the percentage of yeast that would be lost while racking to secondary and why? What is this based on? I've been brewing since 2009 so I'm fairly new and would really like to know what this logic is based on.. I've also done both methods and have had great results with each.
Click to expand...
 
Hackinjeebs said:
It's not so much the yeast that matters here. Its the fact that your exposing it to oxygen and other nasties with out it being necessary. Don't want as much trub etc in your beer? Then run the wort through a filter before pitching your yeast. This will greatly reduce the crap in there. Id rather keep the outside exposure down to a minimum before bottling. Hell, the best idea is to forget you even brewed and come back to it a few weeks later. The less you play with it, the better off your beer is. My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

Yeah but this is just a personal preference. If you make great beer that you've racked to secondary with no infections then why would you worry about contamination? I've never had that issue. I can see why someone would be scared to do a secondary if you messed up a batch and got infected but how would you really even know at which point it got infected?

I feel like this is all personal preference. It's obvious that you can get great results either way. And to anyone who doesn't experiment with different methods and simply goes by what people online say, that's fine, but there is no message board that is the Rosetta Stone of home brewing... The two issues that I see raised here by people who don't secondary are problems with yeast and contamination but people have already proved that you can make great beer by employing a secondary fermentation..
 
Fanoffermentation said:
Ok, well I guess the question now.....how do you determine when this long primary is done? I'm sure by 2-3wks or so you will have a consistent gravity, right? So is it a visual thing then(noticing when all the mess has made it's way back down) or what?
Click to expand...

IMO once it's reached FG (time frame depends on OG, brew made, environmental variables, etc.) the ONLY way to really know its done/ready for bottle/keg is to taste it. If you're unsure if it's ready after tastin it, give it more time.

Depending on what you brew, regularly, you should be able to determine what works best for your OG range batches. I've been focusing on styles from the British Isles, so it's been fairly easy for me to dial in primary time frames. I always build in a 'fudge factor' time too. Typically an extra week, or two, when planning a batch. This has served me very well.

For example, I plan on brewing something for a annual family gathering. I know it will be towards the end of October. This means I need to get the batch/batches brewed before the middle of this month. That will give me enough time for them to ferment and carbonate before the gathering. I might need to use a donor fridge to carbonate them, but that shouldn't be too much of an issue.
 
I only secondary I'm going to bulk ferment for more than 4 weeks or if I'm going to add some flavoring component that I don't want sinking into the yeast cake.
 
Once terminal gravity has been reached, yeast generally only need around 48 hours (as opposed to the weeks I often see quoted around here) to clean up diacetyl and acetaldehyde. Any other "off-flavors" that are still persistent are due to other factors that can be controlled. Pitching the proper amount of healthy yeast and fermenting at cooler temperatures will greatly reduce the amount of time needed to "clean up" the beer.
 
PseudoChef said:
Once terminal gravity has been reached, yeast generally only need around 48 hours (as opposed to the weeks I often see quoted around here) to clean up diacetyl and acetaldehyde. Any other "off-flavors" that are still persistent are due to other factors that can be controlled. Pitching the proper amount of healthy yeast and fermenting at cooler temperatures will greatly reduce the amount of time needed to "clean up" the beer.
Click to expand...

So pseudochef, could you theoretically bottle 2-3 days after terminal gravity, even if that is hit at,say, 2weeks? And assuming the taste is acceptable.
 
Fanoffermentation said:
So pseudochef, could you theoretically bottle 2-3 days after terminal gravity, even if that is hit at,say, 2weeks? And assuming the taste is acceptable.
Click to expand...

I know I'm answering for someone else (sorry pseudochef) but yes you could bottle then and let condition in bottles.

I agree with pseudochef that it only takes approximately 48 hrs to clean up diacetyl and acetaldehyde. Not the weeks people claim on here.
 
As Mpavlik22 said, technically yes. However, you often want to let the beer clear a little more before bottling (at least I would).

If you keg, however, I wouldn't hesitate at all - if I have a free keg, my beer is generally in there within 10-14 days, assuming my fermentation has completed. And this is the part where I'm impatient and have the advantage of kegging - if it's still hazy at kegging, I'll just add gelatin.
 
PseudoChef said:
Once terminal gravity has been reached, yeast generally only need around 48 hours (as opposed to the weeks I often see quoted around here) to clean up diacetyl and acetaldehyde. Any other "off-flavors" that are still persistent are due to other factors that can be controlled. Pitching the proper amount of healthy yeast and fermenting at cooler temperatures will greatly reduce the amount of time needed to "clean up" the beer.
Click to expand...

Though I typically leave my beer 14 days on the cake, I've found this to be true. Sanitation, yeast health, pitch rate, and fermentation temp control really improved the quality of my beer.
 
20000Barrels said:
So the books, recipes and guy working the beer shop stating that you only need primary tank for 4-7 days is true?
Click to expand...

Yes & no. Depends who you ask. I would say yes as soon as you reach FG you get get it outta the primary and condition elsewhere. Others may tell you ( and probably will) to leave it in the primary and forget about it.
 
I've done 3 beers so far now first 14 day primary then bottle second 7 day primary rack to secondary been there for a week third is at 5 days in primary and I will be waiting a total of 3 weeks then bottle due to this thread! THANKS.
 

Similar threads

Gadjobrinus
Current wisdom - just leave it in the primary bucket, rack into bottling bucket?
Replies
31
Views
1K
BrewnWKopperKat
BrewnWKopperKat
jdubdvdt
Bulk Pasteurization Research Thread
Replies
10
Views
549
CKuhns
CKuhns
bubbas45
Really thick krausen (?) on top after weeks of primary
Replies
6
Views
1K
BeerNsteadofH2O
BeerNsteadofH2O
betarhoalphadelta
New grill to augment others---gasser or Blackstone griddle?
Replies
18
Views
472
hottpeper13
H
S
Planning - fig wine
Replies
11
Views
2K
Srimmey
S

Latest posts

Back
Top