A great read on conditioning from MoreBeer!

Found this to be an outstanding read. Do to rights i can't copy it here.

http://morebeer.com/articles/conditioning

I disagree with the 2 week limit of yeast contact in primary
I leave my beer for at least 3 weeks, often longer, on the cake and have not noticed any ill effects

The primary / secondary argument, and time frame for such, has to be the most frustrating part of my experience as a new home brewer. I've read many threads on here about there not being any need for a secondary, and even read an excerpt of an interview with John Palmer saying that a secondary is not necessary.

However, this article appears to be written by John Palmer, and basically states the necessity to use a secondary.

The cliff notes regarding primary/secondary is to get the beer off of the yeast cake and into secondary as soon as attenuation (Primary) is complete. He also states that primary fermentation is complete for ales in usually 2-6 days, and is indicated by the krausen starting to settle back into the beer. However, if for some reason primary takes two or more weeks to finish, go ahead and bottle instead of secondary.


Oh, and the minimum useful time for a secondary is two weeks, with a maximum of six weeks (unless one is going to pitch more yeast at bottling time)?

For those who primary only, how do you judge that the beer is in fact 'done' and ready to be bottled? Krausen drops, wait two more weeks? One week? A month from pitching no matter what? Tastes good so bottle?

Don't worry yourself with absolutes. The whole primary/secondary argument is mostly subjective, with people on both sides saying that their process is ideal, regardless of the truth.

Instead, concern yourself with fermentation and yeast health. How well your yeast behaves and performs will have more to do with the primary/secondary issue than anything else. Once you familiarize yourself with a few yeasts and know how they ferment at the best and worst of times, you'll have a better idea of when to move to a secondary, if at all.

The minimum i go by is 3 weeks in the primary before i take samples. I figure i clear all three stages with out racking into a secondary. This is most beers that i make "ales,pale ales,apa". Porters and stouts,IPAs, dry hoping "big beers" after three weeks i will go to a secondary to let it condition out. I wouldn't take a three month beer and let it sit on the yeast cake that long.

I liked the fact that the article stated the three stages of fermentation. Most new brewers would only see the first two and bottle thinking all is good. I did when i first started. But letting it go the extra time even though the yeast dropped helps it. Just a note my ales are in the primary for no longer than a month at OG 1.050 or less. anything over that gets extra time. Because of this i hardly use my secondary.

VampireSix said:

The primary / secondary argument, and time frame for such, has to be the most frustrating part of my experience as a new home brewer.

Click to expand...

It doesn't need to be!! Simply try both methods and see which one gives you that flavors you like. Then you know which to do.

It is even entirely possible that while you might prefer the flavors you get with a secondary, you don't feel it is worth the extra work and risk of oxidation and contamination to bother. Or it you do feel it is worth it, you will figure out what the steps you need to do with your setup to minimize the extra risks

BxBrewer said:

Found this to be an outstanding read. Do to rights i can't copy it here.

http://morebeer.com/articles/conditioning

Click to expand...

This is a pretty old article. Most of the information it references was written in the mid to late 90's. Yeasts have improved a lot since then.

VampireSix said:

However, this article appears to be written by John Palmer, and basically states the necessity to use a secondary.

Click to expand...

Did you notice that this article was written before his first book came out?

BxBrewer said:

The minimum i go by is 3 weeks in the primary before i take samples.

Click to expand...

Same here! 21 days in Primary and then I will take a hydrometer reading only when I am ready to bottle the same day. I don't want to expose the beer to oxygen and a chance of contamination any more than I have to, so I don't do what some people do and keep opening the fermenter and drawing samples several days in a row to be sure it is done.

I have never had any of my standard ales fail to hit a stable FG in 21 days in primary when fermented at the right temperature for the yeast strain.

LandoLincoln said:

Did you notice that this article was written before his first book came out?

Click to expand...

No, I saw the date at the top (07/27/2012), so figured this was more recent. If this article is in fact older than his first publishing, then it makes more sense.

All the references used by this article are from the early to mid 90's. Some of this information is good and still of value, but some items like "off flavors from leaving in primary for too long" are completely irrelevant and dated.

LandoLincoln said:

This is a pretty old article. Most of the information it references was written in the mid to late 90's. Yeasts have improved a lot since then.

Click to expand...

And most likely so has Palmer's understanding of the subject.

Rick

pjj2ba said:

It doesn't need to be!! Simply try both methods and see which one gives you that flavors you like. Then you know which to do.

It is even entirely possible that while you might prefer the flavors you get with a secondary, you don't feel it is worth the extra work and risk of oxidation and contamination to bother. Or it you do feel it is worth it, you will figure out what the steps you need to do with your setup to minimize the extra risks

Click to expand...

Wow. You can get different flavors from using a secondary? I've been missing out all this time.

bierhaus15 said:

Don't worry yourself with absolutes.

Click to expand...

Bingo...

Stevo2569 said:

Wow. You can get different flavors from using a secondary? I've been missing out all this time.

Click to expand...

It is really more of the other way around. You get extra flavors from extended exposure to the yeast cake. Many folks like these flavors, others prefer to rack off the yeast as they prefer their beer without these flavors. Totally a personal decision. Depending on the style, the differences can be subtle.

I don't have the specifics to reference, but I have read that Palmer, when originally writing How to Brew he detailed the need for a secondary. I believe in his most recent interviews and How to Brew book, not available online, he goes back on his original thinking and discusses the need not to use a secondary, at least when it comes to Ale's that are being bulk aged in a reasonable time frame.

My personal experience, when I first started brewing I was very concerned with primary/secondary and thought buying more equipment and putting more work into my beer would make it better. (The marketing gremlins at work, buy more equipment! make better beer!) I do everything in primary now, including dry hopping.

As a new brewer, in my opinion, you should invest your time and money into pitching lots of healthy yeast (I like www.yeastcalc.com as a guide), using filtered water and knowing your water profile and making sure to remove chlorine/chloramine (I filter and use half a camden tablet for a 5-6g all grain batch). After you get that stuff nailed down then worry about primary/secondary etc.

EDIT: The above paragraph I should also mention focusing on Ferm Temps too.

Agreed! One problem that I think leads to a lot of misconceptions is people tend to forget that the more you brew, the better you get at it. So in the beginning if you are making beer that is drinkable, but not much more it can be difficult to pinpoint the actual cause. Then folks change something and lo and behold the beer is better, and then assumptions, often inaccurate, are made as to why the beer is better. Typically folks might change several things at one (recipe, yeast, fermentation etc.) and then they pick whichever one they feel is responsible. Unfortunately, the wrong one is sometimes picked, and the next you thing you know it, and courtesy of the web, a new myth is born.

Chances are the biggest change is one is simply more experienced and less little mistakes are made resulting in better beer. Heck, if you started out and only brewed one recipe (heresy I know), that first batch would probably taste quite a bit different than the tenth, simply because of experience gained from doing the same process over and over again.

So, get comfortable brewing a number of batches, and then start to make some changes and you will be better equipped to decide if it was the changes that actually made the difference.

Improving my process and being able to taste the difference is what makes this hobby a labor of love. It is a lot of hard work but when you nail something and you get that first person that says "I would pay good money for this." or you think to your self "I would be willing to $12 for a bomber of this, its so good" and you just brewed 5.5g for $30

pjj2ba said:

It is really more of the other way around. You get extra flavors from extended exposure to the yeast cake. Many folks like these flavors, others prefer to rack off the yeast as they prefer their beer without these flavors. Totally a personal decision. Depending on the style, the differences can be subtle.

Click to expand...

Is this from personal experience or you just read that somewhere?

Stevo2569 said:

Is this from personal experience or you just read that somewhere?

Click to expand...

Both! I've brewed many batches both ways. Never back to back. The folks at BYO did however

BYO article
byo-and-basic-brewing-radio-experiment-does-delayed-racking-harm-your-beer??

Plus this is WELL established in winemaking, leaving the wine on the yeast for extra flavors (analogous to delayed racking)

Aging on the lees

Autolysis and wine