Apologies to Revvy

SSBrew - 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.
monty3777

monty3777

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2008
Messages
250
Reaction score
2
I have always been suspicious of the current trend in brewing that leaving beer in a primary for extended periods will IMPROVE beer flavor because the yeast "clean up" during that time. I have said as much in several exchanges with Revvy. I have my reasons to doubt this but I have stated them and won't bother rehashing theories. I never doubted that it wouldn't hurt the beer to let them sit - but I doubted that there would be a marked improvement.

With that said I brewed a Belgian Wit and an IPA in the spring and simply did not have enough time to get them in bottles or kegs until 2 weeks ago. We have finally started drinking them and they are by far the best beers I have ever made - or tasted. In fact I am finding myself reluctant to drink any because I know I will run out soon.

I'm still not sure the improvement has to do with yeast activity - but whatever the reasons I will have to say to those of you, especially Revvy, who I have publically challenged on this forum - I am a choad and I should never be listened to, ever. I think I'll be leaving beers in primaries for several months from here on out. The beers are THAT good. :rockin:
 
That's usually what happens, when someone actually tries it, instead of just "armchair quarterbacking" then they usually become converts.

That's how we ALL did it, we tried it THEN made our decisions.

Enjoy your better beer.

:mug:
 
I made the switch to extended primary over a year ago. I'll just say I'm not lookin' back.
 
I've been out of HBT for about a year, so maybe I'm missing something here. I typically leave my brews in primary for 3-5 weeks before bottling. Are we saying now that leaving them for longer periods works?

I'm not trying to open old wounds or rehash something that's been beat to death. I was laid off back in late '09 and have just recently regained employment (Sept '10). I now have disposable income once again so I'm getting caught back up on homebrewing.
 
Boodlemania said:
I've been out of HBT for about a year, so maybe I'm missing something here. I typically leave my brews in primary for 3-5 weeks before bottling. Are we saying now that leaving them for longer periods works?
.
Click to expand...

No he's just been a naysayer on this topic and is saying he is a convert. You're fine leaving your beers as long as you do.

Though I did just bottle my chocolate mole porter that sat 5.5 months in primary and there were no detrimental effects.
 
To be sure I have left beer in primarys for a long time and never had bad results, but I also never had "better" results - so I do think my conclusions were based on experience. What is different about these two batches is extend times in the fermenter (talking about several months as opposed to, say, one month).

I do wonder what exactly is causing the better results. Yeast activity stops relatively quickly so I wonder if there may be another explanation. Either way - good stuff.
 
Is there a substantial difference between leaving on the yeast cake in primary and letting suspended yeast in secondary do the job? I ask because I have only one 6.5gal primary and several 5 gallons that are only suitable for secondary unless I'm doing mini batches.
 
Boodlemania said:
I've been out of HBT for about a year, so maybe I'm missing something here. I typically leave my brews in primary for 3-5 weeks before bottling. Are we saying now that leaving them for longer periods works?

I'm not trying to open old wounds or rehash something that's been beat to death. I was laid off back in late '09 and have just recently regained employment (Sept '10). I now have disposable income once again so I'm getting caught back up on homebrewing.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that you are back to work!

In the past I have bottled quickly (say two weeks) and I've waited (say a month or a month and a half). I have not really noticed any difference in quality with those time frames. Certainly I have always agreed with the notion that leaving beer in primarys for extended times won't HURT the beer. However, this time I brewed in May and bottled in December. Now I see an actual improvement. The seven month interval seems to have made a real difference.

I should also say that I suspect it's not the yeast but some other factor that makes the beer improve with more time in the fermenter. But since I'm no expert I'll just say that whatever it is - it works.

Here's what I'd do if I were you - brew a batch and forget about it (so long as you have some control over temps) and see for yourself. Nothing to lose but a fermenter!
 
Bradmont said:
Is there a substantial difference between leaving on the yeast cake in primary and letting suspended yeast in secondary do the job? I ask because I have only one 6.5gal primary and several 5 gallons that are only suitable for secondary unless I'm doing mini batches.
Click to expand...

This suggests a great experiment - though I know it doesn't help with your immediate question. I should brew a beer and let one sit in the primary and rack one off into a secondary and let them both sit for 5+ months.

As for your question - I suspect the better quality of beer you will be making is worth another investment in an additional 6.5 gallon ale pale. My results, and I suspect the results of most other folks, suggests there is something in that cake (yes, may even be the yeast) that helps the beer mature in flavor.
 
Jenks829 said:
How vulgar can I be in the definition?
Click to expand...

No need to be vulgar... think about a wheel of cheese.

Usually I will leave my beer only on the yeast for one week per my kit instructions, then transfer to secondary for another week per kit instructions. Then I bottle it and drink it after a week per kit instructions. Hahahaha! just kiddin.
 
How about some help on this:

I am itching to do another Pliny, and have never left in primary or secondary for longer than instructions (1 -2 weeks). Since this takes a good dose of secondary hops, what kind of (long term) schedule would be suggested for both primary and secondary. I have 5 batches pipelined and ready to consume, so time is not a factor in getting this ready to drink. I would want it ready for sometime in Spring.

Sheldon
 
sheeldon said:
How about some help on this:

I am itching to do another Pliny, and have never left in primary or secondary for longer than instructions (1 -2 weeks). Since this takes a good dose of secondary hops, what kind of (long term) schedule would be suggested for both primary and secondary. I have 5 batches pipelined and ready to consume, so time is not a factor in getting this ready to drink. I would want it ready for sometime in Spring.

Sheldon
Click to expand...

DO NOT USE A SECONDARY. For pliny and most any dry hopped beer, I recommend 7-10 days of fermentation in the primary. Then add the dry hops to the primary and let sit for an additional 7-10 days. rack to bottle or keg. So that's a total of 14-20 days all is done in the primary. No need for a secondary. Drink fresh.

DISCLAIMER: These methods assume you pitch the proper amount of healthy yeast, oxygenate your wort and properly control your fermentation temps. If you do all that pliny will be ready to drink straight away when it's still fresh and the hop flavors are at their peak.
 
I think the largest benefit of extending primary is that the beer clears.

I've tried rushing a few beers that were left very yeasty. After sitting in the bottle forever the yeast usually settled out and the beers turned the corner to fantastic.

I nearly dumped a beer that tasted bad and let it age in the bottles. The major difference was that the beer turned bright. It went from nearly being dumped to absolutely fantastic.

my $0.02
 
Revvy said:
Though I did just bottle my chocolate mole porter that sat 5.5 months in primary and there were no detrimental effects.
Click to expand...
Ah, that leads nicely into my question. I'm on board with extended primaries when it's entirely or mostly yeast down there, but I've been going to secondary when there's a ton of additives during the boil or in the primary -- coffee, cinnamon, whatever. The idea being of course that I want to get at least most of the mass out of there. You just leave it? What about fruit?
 
i can't wait to get my pipeline going. i really am excited to see what i can create by leaving things alone for months. all the talk of long extended primaries is music to my ears.
 
Bradmont said:
Is there a substantial difference between leaving on the yeast cake in primary and letting suspended yeast in secondary do the job? I ask because I have only one 6.5gal primary and several 5 gallons that are only suitable for secondary unless I'm doing mini batches.
Click to expand...

Who said you had to leave the yeast cake behind? Can you not carefully stir it back into suspension(being mindful not to aerate the beer) and transfer it to the secondary? Why wouldn't it have the same effect when it settled back out?
 
Nokitchen said:
Ah, that leads nicely into my question. I'm on board with extended primaries when it's entirely or mostly yeast down there, but I've been going to secondary when there's a ton of additives during the boil or in the primary -- coffee, cinnamon, whatever. The idea being of course that I want to get at least most of the mass out of there. You just leave it? What about fruit?
Click to expand...

While a 1 week primary is probably too short for many beers and a 2 week primary will really help give the yeast time to clean up flavors, longer then that really doesn't help anything. Once the yeast has finished fermenting and fully floculated, it's time to bottle or keg. For most ales, this time period can be a short as 5 days or as long as 3 weeks.

5.5 months is not any better then 2 weeks. and in cases where you have junk like coffee and dry hops, I'd get it out sooner rather then latter. But still I see no reason to secondary. Just wait for the yeast to finish in the primary and then bottle or keg.

Fruit is the one time I'd use a secondary. with fruit I don't want to add it until the main ferment is done. Then I rack the beer off the yeast onto the fruit in the secondary. There are some delicate aromas in fruit that would be lost if they are part of the main ferment.
 
monty3777 said:
I am a choad and I should never be listened to, ever. I think I'll be leaving beers in primaries for several months from here on out. The beers are THAT good. :rockin:
Click to expand...

How can we believe any part of your post?

LOL
 
Cipper said:
A more relevant question: how many pseudonyms does
"revvy" use on this listserv?

Chris
Click to expand...

WTF??? You think I have time to post under multiple names????:confused:

Bradmont said:
When was the last time you actually saw an active LISTSERV?
Click to expand...

Snicker, I haven't heard that term since Al Gore and I sat around drinking rolling rocks and dreaming up the internetz. ;)








Do they even still make Rolling Rock?
 
Back on topic:

For extended primary fermentation, do you need a glass fermenter rather than the plastic bucket to avoid oxygen permeation through the plastic?

Also, I'm assuming there is no transfer to secondary after the extended primary?
 
Cipper said:
A more relevant question: how many pseudonyms does
"revvy" use on this listserv?

Chris
Click to expand...

Well, I will admit to being a Lutheran pastor. If I recall correctly Revvy is a Methodist.

If you go back and read some of my older threads/posts you will see that Revvy and I rarely see eye to eye. I will also continue to maintain, as I have on this thread, that I suspect that active yeast is not the cause of the improvement of beer quality when the beer is left for extended times in the primary.

Back to the thread - I do like the idea that perhaps the yeast dropping out of solution could contribute to a better tasting beer.
 
Revvy said:
That's usually what happens, when someone actually tries it, instead of just "armchair quarterbacking" then they usually become converts.

That's how we ALL did it, we tried it THEN made our decisions.

Enjoy your better beer.

:mug:
Click to expand...

Most important thing to take away from this thread right there.

If you run into something that's contrary to what you think is right in brewing, give it a shot and see how it turns out. Then you can see for yourself and if you're still right then you can rip people to shreds ;)
 
I have a 11.4% Bourbon Vanilla Porter that is going to sit for 3 weeks in the primary and then another 3 or 4 in the secondary on top of the Makers Mark and Vanilla. This is going to sit at least 6 months before I look at cracking one open
 
I just started leaving my beers in primary for 3 weeks minimum (with the exception of Hefeweizen which I will do for about 7-10 days).

Usually I'll let them go about 3-4 weeks.
 
PRIMARY? We don't need no stinkin' primary

Ferment in the secondary. That way there is never an issue!

Nevermind.

You may now return to the regularly scheduled topic...
 
RM-MN said:
Who said you had to leave the yeast cake behind? Can you not carefully stir it back into suspension(being mindful not to aerate the beer) and transfer it to the secondary? Why wouldn't it have the same effect when it settled back out?
Click to expand...

In that case the reason for racking to a secondary would be? :confused:
 

Similar threads

Clint Yeastwood
The History of Aging IPA
Replies
9
Views
672
AmarikinBrew
AmarikinBrew
H
Spectrum hops
Replies
4
Views
431
HT Shen
H
F
i dont brew to style
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
Danny Wallace
Danny Wallace
Z
Simplifying brewing
2
Replies
56
Views
3K
BrewnWKopperKat
BrewnWKopperKat
Zippy123
Reality check on Water Chemistry
Replies
27
Views
2K
WortMonger
WortMonger
InkBird 300

Latest posts

Back
Top