is there any point of secondary fermenting a stout?

I was just wondering since my stout is an opaque black is there any reason to clear it in a secondary fermentor?

There is more going on in the secondary than just clearing. Conditioning, which is the third phase of fermentation, gives the yeast time to clean up after themselves. Once the majority of fermentable sugars have been converted, the yeast go to work on all sorts of other compounds they produced during the aggressive primary phase. Once they are done, they will flocculate out as well.

Conditioning doesn't have to take place in a secondary at all. It can occur in an extended stay in the primary or in the bottle or keg, but it needs to happen before the beer is at it's best.

John

I'd say "YEs" especially for a stout. Those harsh flavors need MORE TIME to mellow out.

We're all conditioned by the BMC "Fresh Beer Tastes Better" campaign. Think of making beer like cooking chicken: you don't want to consume it before it's done.

I think Hefe's are the only "chicken tartar" beers. They don't need a secondary since you want a lot of yeast in them.

Although it is unecessary (technically) for you to rack to a glass carboy and sit it for two weeks, etc., you are not saving any time. You will still need to let that beer condition as cheese, b4b, and john recommend.

im just wondering will it be any different if i secondary than if they are just in bottles longer?

grrtt78 said:

im just wondering will it be any different if i secondary than if they are just in bottles longer?

Click to expand...

There are differing opinions on this. Here is the opinion of the author of "How to Brew", John Palmer, on the subject of bottle condtioning versus secondary fermentor.

John Palmer said:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Secondary Fermentor vs. Bottle Conditioning[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Conditioning is a function of the yeast, therefore it is logical that the greater yeast mass in the fermentor is more effective at conditioning than the smaller amount of suspended yeast in the bottle. This is why I recommend that you give your beer more time in the fermentor before bottling. When you add the priming sugar and bottle your beer, the yeast go through the same three stages of fermentation as the main batch, including the production of byproducts. If the beer is bottled early, i.e. 1 week old, then that small amount of yeast in the bottle has to do the double task of conditioning the priming byproducts as well as those from the main ferment. You could very well end up with an off-flavored batch.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Do not be confused, I am not saying that bottle conditioning is bad, it is different. Studies have shown that priming and bottle conditioning is a very unique form of fermentation due to the oxygen present in the head space of the bottle. Additional fermentables have been added to the beer to produce the carbonation, and this results in very different ester profiles than those that are normally produced in the main fermentor. In some styles, like Belgian Strong Ale, bottle conditioning and the resultant flavors are the hallmark of the style. These styles cannot be produced with the same flavors via kegging.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For the best results, the beer should be given time in a secondary fermentor before priming and bottling. Even if the yeast have flocculated and the beer has cleared, there are still active yeast in suspension that will ferment the priming sugar and carbonate the beer.

Click to expand...

[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]John
[/FONT]