Secondary Fermentation - To Rack or Not to Rack

Experiment a little with it i think, I think some people get too dogmatic about brewing. I was watching a video with john palmer and he will brew a million different ways because he is still experimenting. I like to think about it in mathematical terms.

nCr = n!/r!(n-r)!


I think the formula for the combination can yield more possibilities than naught!

Revvy said:

After a month in primary your beer is crystal clear, very clean and crisp tasting. And when you rack to bottle you leave behind a really dense yeast/trub cake.

Click to expand...

Responding to an old posting in this thread. Not sure if Revvy is still reading or if anyone else has an opinion.

After a month in primary and with 'really dense yeast/trub cake", is there still enough yeast in suspension to get a good bottle carb?

I've been leaving my beer in primary for 3 weeks and getting a compact yeast layer at the bottom of the fermenter. I have a spout near the bottom of the fermenter and draw off the beer to the bottling bucket without disturbing the yeast cake. My beers have been undercarbing and I am wondering if I am not getting enough yeast into the beer that is going into the bottles.

smyrnaquince said:

After a month in primary [...] is there still enough yeast in suspension to get a good bottle carb?

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

smyrnaquince said:

My beers have been undercarbing

Click to expand...

You're probably either not storing the bottles somewhere warm enough (70° F is ideal), not waiting long enough (2-3 weeks minimum), or aren't using enough priming sugar (I use Northern Brewer's priming sugar calculator), or are brewing very high gravity beers (10+% ABV). But "not enough yeast" is definitely not the problem unless you've taken steps specifically to remove or kill the yeast (filtration, pasteurization, dosing with potassium or sodium metabisulphite). I even cold crash my beers and clarify with gelatin, and they still bottle carb with no problem whatsoever.

If you really want to secondary, because you want a good clear light beer.....there is one safe way to do it, without risking oxidation.

Sanitize your secondary.....

Take a plastic tupperware container and drill a hole that a rubber gromit will fit into...on the top of the tupper ware container.....fit the end of clear vinyl tube into the gromit of the tupperware container, and run the other end, to the bottom of the secondary fermenter..(carboy, etc).....

fill the tupperware container halfway with water, put in a chunk of dry ice, and put the lid on tight, to the tupperware container..

That dry ice hitting spring water starts evaporating into co2 gas rapidly..

It fills up the extra air in the tupper ware, and goes through the vinyl tube into the secondary carboy....and starts filling the carboy with a white fog....

Prep your auto siphon and its vinyl tube by running it into the bottom of the secondary as well....

Once the secondary is overflowing with co2 gas...it will have displaced a majority of the oxygen from the secondary fermenter....then start your auto siphon draining from the primary into the secondary.

Remove the hose supplying co2....

As the beer leaves the primary and enters the secondary...it will displace the co2 and push it out the top....once the primary is done draining....remover the beer hose, and cap the secondary....

You are now secondary fermenting in a low oxygen enviroment, allowing your beer to clear, without introducing any other pathogens and without oxidizing your beer.

jimmy-blue-eyes said:

If you really want to secondary, because you want a good clear light beer.....there is one safe way to do it, without risking oxidation.

[...]

You are now secondary fermenting in a low oxygen enviroment, allowing your beer to clear, without introducing any other pathogens and without oxidizing your beer.

Click to expand...

That's a clever trick I haven't heard before, but I can't resist pointing out that racking to secondary doesn't actually improve beer clarity in any way. There are a handful of good reasons to rack to secondary, but "clearer beer" is not one of them. It's an outdated myth.

That said, where can I get some dry ice?

A lot of grocery stores carry em.

I'll have to keep an eye out for them from now on. Quick question though: Why not just toss the dry ice directly into the pail, put the lid on (loosely), and just wait for the ice to completely sublimate into gas and displace all the oxygen out of the bucket?

Faster in water, and ya dont want somethinf as cold as dry ice touching the glass secondary....it makes it super cold...and just a temp difference in the midwest of having the heat on in your car on a cold day can crack a windshield....(ever hear metal scream when it touches dry ice.....)?

kombat said:

You're probably either not storing the bottles somewhere warm enough (70° F is ideal), not waiting long enough (2-3 weeks minimum), or aren't using enough priming sugar (I use Northern Brewer's priming sugar calculator), or are brewing very high gravity beers (10+% ABV). But "not enough yeast" is definitely not the problem unless you've taken steps specifically to remove or kill the yeast (filtration, pasteurization, dosing with potassium or sodium metabisulphite). I even cold crash my beers and clarify with gelatin, and they still bottle carb with no problem whatsoever.

Click to expand...

You cold crash before moving the beer to the bottling bucket and you have enough yeast? Hmm.

I usually let the bottles sit at room temperature for 2 weeks. These are "normal" FG beers with no filtration, etc., so I am guessing it is a time issue. I wind up with only a very small yeast layer at the bottoms of the bottles. I typically use the tastybrew priming calculator.

Revvy, my man. There is no more to say. I will ask non believers to try. Keep the beer in primary for 3-4 weeks and the keg/bottle. No need to cool crash. You can even make a control batch of thesame ingredients which you will rack to secondary and compare. I am for extended primary 90% of the time


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

OLDBREW said:

Revy seems to use we as an authority. No real tested data. Brewing Science books don't use hearsey. They use test labs and analyzers to prove the theory.

I know that a lot of keeping wort on the trub is yeast dependent. Certain yeast strains will be okay for a while, others will not and will spit out off flavors in your brew. If you have a 100 IBU brew, you may not taste them or anything else for that matter, but if you try to make a pils or lite lager with low hop ibu's they will show up.

Leaving fermented wort on the trub for long periods of time with no off flavors is an exception, not the rule

If you use certain yeasts they will eat themselves if there isn't enough food

Click to expand...

Just to level the playing field, Oldbrew. Revvy may openly admit he uses anecdotal findings for proof... but you seem to quote test data, but do not provide citation.

I would be very interested to see you laboratory evidence, because I am considering using a secondary.

quantummechanic84 said:

Hi...

My first post...seems like a heated topic.

First, I would like to ask if anybody has any solid research. While Revvy and everybody else are making very emotional arguments about how great they do things, the evidence they are presenting is purely anecdotal and has no scientific basis whatsoever.

What I gather here is that you want to use the secondary as a clearing stage and are looking for clarity points.

So here is what I am going to do. I have a few potential sources for homebrewing experimentation. If nobody has any actual studies in this to provide, I will propose to them that we do this:

1) Brew a beer of their choice that is not terribly dark (as dark beers would not benefit much from a clearing stage anyway)

2) Rack half to a secondary.

3) Proceed exactly the same with both beers through the bottling stage.

4) I will take both beer samples to my lab to be analyzed with a spectrophotometer (a device that measures light absorbance in a chemical sample) The clearer beer should exhibit less absorbance. In order to keep a good randomization, I will hope that at least 10 homebrewers will actually want to go through with this experiment.

Then, we can see if it indeed does make clearer beer.

Sound like a good idea?

Click to expand...

How did the study go? Any conclusions yet?

Ditch the secondary dudes. I keep my beers on the primary for 3 weeks and nothing happens independent of IBU. Must admit I have not made many lagers to comment accurately. It is unnecessary for ales


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

I have racked and not racked, and I have never been able to tell a difference in taste. I don't rack when I'm lazy, and I rack because it tends to end up in a little less trub/crap in my bottles.

EDIT: And it's funny to see that John Palmer quote taken out of context so many times in this thread.

Knowing this an old post...it really helps. My first few 5 gal were secondary racks. I hear now that's a bad idea due to infection and oxidation risk. Mostly a good post and info...thanks!

I've been doing a secondary for years, and haven't had a problam yet. You can dry hop/whatever in the secondary, and re-pitch out of the primary. Less sedimant to deal with when it comes to bottle/keg. Less risk of arobic infection/autolysis. If you keep your stuff clean it takes a couple minuets to sanitise, a couple more to syphon. It's not a lot of work.

Adam Selene

I rack to secondary. No matter how hard I try to skim the bottom of primary to prevent trub pickup, it always happens to some degree. I even try to account for up to an extra gallon of wort to allow some to remain in the primary to transfer less trub. Do whatever works for you. I personally don't care if people think I'm wasting time with an extra step. I always have clear beer and my methods work for me. Oxidation is only an issue if you're careless and since I keg, I can shoot co2 into the secondary vessel to settle on top of the racked beer. Different strokes.

I have been racking to secondary since I started homebrewing several years ago, with only one infection (and I am fairly sure it was not the secondary). Probably starting next batch I will be ditching the secondary unless I lager.

But.... I recently brewed two high gravity beers and moved them to a secondary where I plan to leave them for a couple weeks (including a dry hop). Would a longer primary be applicable even here?? They both smell quite potent and I thought a short time (2-4 weeks) would take a little of the bite away wrt a 8-9% beer. Am I wrong here?? Should I let them age longer in the bottle after carbonation?? These are my first imperial brews. One other note is this is the first time I have used sugar in the. boil. I wonder if that is why my brew smells very potent??



Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

I'm guessing that the "potent" smell is likely CO2, as alcohol will not be that high yet.

I guess if you are a believer in the wisdom of not racking, a barley wine would be a good example - why risk infection or oxidation in a brew that may be stored for years?

My primary is opaque and not air tight. So I've decided that the rule is - no peaking until it's time to keg or bottle. THAT is the hardest part.

What would be the suggested time for an extended primary on a Bavarian Hefeweizen. I read somewhere that the esters deteriorate if you go too long.

Thoughts?

IMO theres no scientific proof (actually papers written, studies presenting facts) that leaving our wonderful single cell yeast in primary is more effective than wracking off.

All beers are better off with more time on them. Which is where I feel most of the benefits you non wrackers see. Which is a good thing. You're making better beers and that's what you're wanting to accomplish. Awesome

I've done my own side by side testing splitting the exact same batches. As I hope all of you promoting no secondaries have done your testing to prove your theory.

I will continue to secondary. My pluses out way the negatives. Quality beer is my goal.

Not trying to push anyone one way or the other. Just telling you to do your own testing, cone to your own conclusions, and make some kickasss beers

Cheers

MoveMaine said:

What would be the suggested time for an extended primary on a Bavarian Hefeweizen. I read somewhere that the esters deteriorate if you go too long.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

My understanding is that Hefeweizen is a style best enjoyed fresh. I have one in primary now. The plan is a 10 day ferment at 67F crash cool for a couple of days and the keg.

Codfishhead said:

IMO theres no scientific proof (actually papers written, studies presenting facts) that leaving our wonderful single cell yeast in primary is more effective than wracking off.

All beers are better off with more time on them. Which is where I feel most of the benefits you non wrackers see. Which is a good thing. You're making better beers and that's what you're wanting to accomplish. Awesome

I've done my own side by side testing splitting the exact same batches. As I hope all of you promoting no secondaries have done your testing to prove your theory.

I will continue to secondary. My pluses out way the negatives. Quality beer is my goal.

Not trying to push anyone one way or the other. Just telling you to do your own testing, cone to your own conclusions, and make some kickasss beers

Cheers

Click to expand...

Have I been spelling it incorrectly? I thought it was "racking". Also some beers are designed for a quick turnaround and consumption to get the most out of their hop forward profiles. Prolonged aging in these instances is contra-indicated as far as I am aware.

Gavin C said:

Have I been spelling it incorrectly?

Click to expand...

Yes you have. He's spelling it wright.

WOW this is a blast from the past... I havnt seen this thread in years. To answer your question I will just tell you what I do, and hopefully it will help you and your process.

with ALL of my beers I do 4 weeks in the primary, I crash down to ~40 the last 2 days of that time period. Then I go straight to the keg, turn on the 10PSI (my serving pressure) and put the keg in my keezer (which is @35F). From there I let it sit for a minimum of 2 weeks. At which point ill pull a sample and make sure the carbonation is correct (which it usually is) and bam.. clear tasty carbonated beer.

EDIT: Sidenote,.. this assumes you pitched the correct amount of healthy yeast into your wort at the beginning of fermentation and that your fermentation was controlled. If they die from shock or fall out from temperature fluctuation then your results will be different

Mirilis said:

EDIT: Sidenote,.. this assumes you pitched the correct amount of healthy yeast into your wort at the beginning of fermentation and that your fermentation was controlled. If they die from shock or fall out from temperature fluctuation then your results will be different

Click to expand...

Always worth reviving an old thread when it has value. I'm new, so it has value to me. :cross:

My fermentation temp has been consistent @ 70-72 ( a little warmer when it was really active) so, I'll be leaving it for a while and see what happens.

I feel like I deserve to have a post on this thread because I have finished reading all 145 posts to this thread.

Last week, I started my 4th and my 5th batches. One is an Indian Dark Ale and the other a black IPA. Both are kits from NB and both call for a secondary "fermentation."

1 to 2 weeks in the primary and then 2 to 4 in the secondary.

After a good thorough read of this thread, I am planning on doing 4 weeks in the primary and dry hopping right into the primary a week or so before racking to the bottling bucket (that is to say, at week 2 or 3 in the primary).

I do have an imperial stout I am planning to do that calls for 2 to 3 MONTHS in the secondary and I am glad that my purchase of a 5 gallon carboy was not in vain, because I do NOT plan on leaving the stout in a primary for 3 months.

But a month for my ales... I will be very happy and (as a result of this thread) confident with leaving my ales in the primary for 4 weeks.

both brews turned out WONDERFUL! Delicious beers and only after 2 weeks of bottle conditioning. I am very impressed to say the least and glad I took the time to read the this thread. It saved me from the messing around of racking to the secondary on two accounts and countless in the future.

I've just read the 147 posts and six year long discussion, but I still have a question.
I'm (almost) convinced to drop secondary and last longer the primary (up to 4 weeks), and, not to re-activate the "war", I precise that is for me to make my own judgement on the issue.

However, I'd like to do it well, so I'd like to know if when talking about long primary, you kept the temp at the "primary temp" (say 22°C ~71°F in my case) during all the 4 weeks?

I ask because, I mainly racked into secondary until now once FG was reached, and let the beer at a lower temp (12-14°C ~ 54-57°F), and I tought that was the utility of secondary (more than avoiding autolysis or similar), and probably what led to different results with secondary than with long primary. I've heard that cooler temp (even far from cold crashing) in secondary makes better / clearer beers. Is this also questionable?

Can I let my beer in primary at 71°C (room temp + some degree inside the bucket)? Or should I move it into cooler temp even if not racking?

Thanks for learningful debate anyway.
Hez,

Hezpae said:

I've just read the 147 posts and six year long discussion, but I still have a question.
I'm (almost) convinced to drop secondary and last longer the primary (up to 4 weeks), and, not to re-activate the "war", I precise that is for me to make my own judgement on the issue.

However, I'd like to do it well, so I'd like to know if when talking about long primary, you kept the temp at the "primary temp" (say 22°C ~71°F in my case) during all the 4 weeks?

I ask because, I mainly racked into secondary until now once FG was reached, and let the beer at a lower temp (12-14°C ~ 54-57°F), and I tought that was the utility of secondary (more than avoiding autolysis or similar), and probably what led to different results with secondary than with long primary. I've heard that cooler temp (even far from cold crashing) in secondary makes better / clearer beers. Is this also questionable?

Can I let my beer in primary at 71°C (room temp + some degree inside the bucket)? Or should I move it into cooler temp even if not racking?

Thanks for learningful debate anyway.
Hez,

Click to expand...

I pitch yeast, and come back in a month...so yes I am leaving the beer at or near whatever my fermentation temp is. It's not complicated.

On the other hand if you are running a temp controller and a fridge to keep the fermentation below "room" temp, there is some merit to letting the fermenter warm back up during the conditioning phase...

I posted years ago some information on the diacetyl thread info I found (basically backing up the long primary argument I was talking about) that in ALES just like in Lagers, there is benefit in letting the temp drift upwards. One reason I believe is that it helps to wake up any sluggish yeast, which will 1)help complete the eating of any missed sugars and 2) they well "eat" the byproducts such as diacetyl.



But honestly as I have said repeatedly in other discussions, this isn't rocket science or all that complicated... just pitching yeast and coming back in a month is perfectly fine....

Much more crucial to good beer is the temp during the initial first few days to a week of PRIMARY fermentation, NOT so much the temps during the conditioning phase of things.

Ok, so this is very simple, though you've got to be patient (not so simple when I smell what is coming off the air locker : flavor of Equinox/ Cascade/Simcoe)
Thanks for the answer anyway, I'll give a try.

Hez,

Hezpae said:

. . . flavor of Equinox/ Cascade/Simcoe . . .

Click to expand...

Average gravity hop forward beer? IMO, even with a dry hop, should be in bottle / keg in less than 3 weeks. Probably two.

AnOldUR said:

Average gravity hop forward beer? IMO, even with a dry hop, should be in bottle / keg in less than 3 weeks. Probably two.

Click to expand...

Yes, I've brew an American IPA, hoppy, fruity with balanced IBU around 70, and high gravity (OG was 1.070) (balancing the BU : GU ratio to around 1).

Does it changes something concerning primary duration? I haven't dry hopped yet, I was planning on doing it 5 to 3 days before conditioning, whatever the total primary length.

Why would you advice to reduce primary? Afraid that the hops aroma would leave?

Hezpae said:

Why would you advice to reduce primary? Afraid that the hops aroma would leave?

Click to expand...

You can't really reduce primary fermentation. It's done when it's done and only a gravity reading (or experience) will tell you that. With good technique (proper pitch, temperature control . . .), a beer that size should be done fermenting and cleaned up in around 10 days. At that point it's safe to dry hop either in a secondary or your primary vessel. A 3-5 day dry hop is good. Get it carbonated (bottle or keg) and start drinking. Hops aroma and flavor does fade. As long as you don't have off flavors that need conditioning out, drink up.

AnOldUR said:

You can't really reduce primary fermentation.

Click to expand...

Sure... I was talking about "extra time" of primary, once FG is reached.
So fr IPA related styles I'll just do ~10days of primary (and make sure FG is reached), then 3-5 days dry hop; and 2 days of cold crashing before conditioning.

Does this seem more appropriate to you than 3-4 weeks of primary, followed by the same schedule?

Ps : I understand the concerned about hop flavor volatility, but I've recently drink an "old" bottle from a similar beer I brewed 9 month ago, stored cool since then, and I found it very nice, maybe less harsh in bitterness, but the fruity flavor was still there. But perhaps the bottle keeps it better than the fermentor does.

Hezpae said:

Does this seem more appropriate to you than 3-4 weeks of primary, followed by the same schedule?

Click to expand...

It does to me.

But if you're seeing and improvement in your American IPA's after 9 months, you're doing something different than I am (in a good way) and should continue doing it. In my hop forward beers, I find that hop bitterness persists, but flavor and aroma fade over that period of time.

AnOldUR said:

It does to me.

But if you're seeing and improvement in your American IPA's after 9 months

Click to expand...

I didn't see a proper improvement, but the flavor of the hops (Mosaic mainly) was definitively there, with a very pleasant nose. I've done massive hop addition at the late of the boil (~2min), then dry hopping for around a week. It was one of my first batches, so I don't think I've made anything very special better than anyone else. Certainly the combination of hop variety (Mosaic is moire oily and more "powerfull" than cascade for example (IMO)), hop quantity (I put a lot of it back then, something like 6-7g/l I let you convert in american units), and bottle conditioning (very cool), made the hop flavor remain even months after.
But all this is of course....

I've dry hop today, after 11 days of primary, I'm planning on bottling/keggin the next weekend (9-10 days), just in time for dry hop and cold crash.
Cheers, and thanks again AnOldUR for the advices