4 week Primary: Ridiculous!

[RCCOLA]

I keep seeing post after post recommending noobs to keep their beer in primary for 4+ weeks--"If you want to make good beer"

If you practice good sanitization, keep fermentation temps below 70F, and pitch an appropriate amount of yeast, 4 weeks is not necessary to make great beer.

Most 1.060 OG ales and below are ready to package after 10 days. If the yeast has settled, the FG has stabilized, the beer has dropped clear, and tastes good, then it's ready to be bottled or kegged.

Use your taste buds to direct your methods of making good beer and don't let it be dictated by some regurgitated timeline.

As for myself, I brew all grain, start from RO water, add ions for the characteristics I want in the beer, and adjust pH to around 5.4 at room temp,
ferment in a wine fridge and keep ales at ~ 64-65F.

My beer is usually ready to package at 10 days. If it isn't, then it sits until it is.

What I'm getting at is: Don't repeat what you hear without making your own decisions. Use your experience (and tastebuds) to decide when your own beer is finished--not what someone else says.

 

[kyleobie]

I agree, but I usually let mine sit and age a bit to avoid drinking all of it before it hits its peak.

 

[drhookmec]

I agree also most beers i make even Lagers
Are drinkable in 2 weeks.

 

[TopherM]

I agree also most beers i make even Lagers Are drinkable in 2 weeks.

If by drinkable you mean uncarbonated and very low OG and ABV. Basically uncarbonated yellow water.

 

[fifthcircle]

3day primary FTW!!!!!









Just kidding

 

[kh54s10]

If you like your beer less that it could be. Go for it.
I go with the more vocal few
I have noticed that the beer that I don't rush IS NOTICEABLY better!!!!!

 

[HopSong]

Well, I'm a noob.. I only have two batches under my belt. Yes, my FG's are there in 10 days.. but, certainly not ready to drink. Maybe it would be acceptable if I kegged. Mine are all getting better after 3 weeks in primary and 3+ weeks in the bottle. But, I guess I'm an ignorant noob that is following some of the more experienced brewers.

Forums have a lot of trouble, granted, with parrots repeating what seems to be common consensus.. But, there are some quite experienced brewers here that I would chose to follow rather than opt for your 10 day rule. At least it's working for me. YMMV

 

[nukinfuts29]

And so begins yet ANOTHER topic on this dead horse of a subject....

 

[mikeysab]

I would agree about beers being ready to drink in 10 days, but people do brew beers that take longer to condition whether they're 1.060 or under. To rant on about 4 week primary being ridiculous is silly . Like the OP said, let your tastebuds dictate when your beer is finished. Well, we're not all professionals who brew perfect beers that could be brewed, carbed, and drank in 10 days like the OP apparently is. Even a 1.050 beer could have something in it that could benefit from a bit of aging. Sure, in an ideal world, we'd never make mistakes, but this isn't some dream world where everything goes perfect every brew day.

 

[kh54s10]

And so begins yet ANOTHER topic on this dead horse of a subject....

HE brought it up!

 

[mikeysab]

And so begins yet ANOTHER topic on this dead horse of a subject....

It's been that kind of day, hasn't it? This one seems to have something else going on though. Somes pissed, and he ain't afraid to show it, show it, show it.

 

[nukinfuts29]

It's been that kind of day, hasn't it?

It sure has!

 

[jonmohno]

I would like to know what kind of beer and what yeast you are considering these that good. From my short experience, about 100% of the time they have only gotten better conditioning,only speaking of maybe 40 beers or so in a years time.10 days=my first beer which i will never do again. Unless im feeling adventerous. If that works for you,then thats great

 

[nukinfuts29]

I keep seeing post after post recommending noobs to keep their beer in primary for 4+ weeks--"If you want to make good beer"

Most of the time this is from a few, very vocal members who obviously post more than they brew.

For those of us who brew more than we run our mouths, practice good sanitization, keep fermentation temps below 70F, and pitch an appropriate amount of yeast, the 4 week idea is just ignorant.

Most 1.060 OG ales and below are ready to package after 10 days. If the yeast has settled, the FG has stabilized, the beer has dropped clear, and tastes good, then it's ready to be bottled or kegged.

Use your taste buds to direct your methods of making good beer and don't let it be dictated by some regurgitated timeline.

As for myself, I brew all grain, start from RO water, add ions for the characteristics I want in the beer, and adjust pH to around 5.4 at room temp,
ferment in a wine fridge and keep ales at ~ 64-65F.

My beer is usually ready to package at 10 days. If it isn't, then it sits until it is.

What I'm getting at is: Don't repeat what you hear without making your own decisions. Use your experience (and tastebuds) to decide when your own beer is finished--not what someone else says.

You strike me as above normal in intelligence. Oh wise one I inquire of you, should we use plastic or glass? All grain or extract?

Oh and can I get the winning lotto numbers? I know you don't need them, someone as smart and cool as you must have no need for stacking papers.

 

[RCCOLA]

Those of you who instantly went into attack mode should read the OP.

It states to use your taste buds to decide when a beer is done--not what someone else tells you.

If it needs more than 10 days to taste good, then let it sit till it tastes good--but don't let it sit for no other reason than someone else told you to.

 

[jonmohno]

Because those people may be afraid of it getting it better as told,but who needs advice from experience brewers anyway.Inflate the ego.Your above and beyond all.

 

[Jwood]

I usually leave it 3-4 weeks, and then keg (and let it condition in the keg). My beer just isn't that good before those extra weeks, other people tell me it is, but i don't agree. I do know a short primary can be done. Stone Brewery "primaries" their beer for 6 days at the most i believe. Although...they are doing everything right.

 

[mikeysab]

You came out with guns blazing, accusing people of posting more than they brew, but you're some genius that brews and doesn't run your mouth. How should people respond to that? Should we all have said "Oh high and mighty brewlord, we agree, we all suck, and post more than we brew and shall listen to your 10 day rule." Not everyone brews drinkable beers in ten days. I doubt many people do, so chill out and let people decide for themselves. Don't come out of the gate so strong next time, and you won't be met with people in attack mode. I read the OP, and that's the impression I got.

 

[Batinse]

Those of you who instantly went into attack mode should read the OP.

Lol. Yes. The well-reasoned, cool-headed, and not-at-all deliberately incendiary OP that is in no way spoiling for a fight.

 

[nukinfuts29]

Those of you who instantly went into attack mode should read the OP.

It states to use your taste buds to decide when a beer is done--not what someone else tells you.

If it needs more than 10 days to taste good, then let it sit till it tastes good--but don't let it sit for no other reason than someone else told you to.

 

[RCCOLA]

You came out with guns blazing, accusing people of posting more than they brew, but you're some genius that brews and doesn't run your mouth. How should people respond to that? Should we all have said "Oh high and mighty brewlord, we agree, we all suck, and post more than we brew and shall listen to your 10 day rule." Not everyone brews drinkable beers in ten days. I doubt many people do, so chill out and let people decide for themselves. Don't come out of the gate so strong next time, and you won't be met with people in attack mode. I read the OP, and that's the impression I got.

Point taken. Here's a little info for the discussion.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/aging-beer-facts-myths-discussion-84005/

 

[bob1852]

Those of you who instantly went into attack mode should read the OP.

It states to use your taste buds to decide when a beer is done--not what someone else tells you.

If it needs more than 10 days to taste good, then let it sit till it tastes good--but don't let it sit for no other reason than someone else told you to.

So we shouldn't listen to what someone else says but we should listen to what you say?

For what its worth, my highest scoring beer in a BJCP comp was an 8 weeks primary....I left it there out of laziness, not because someone told me to.

 

[Krane]

The thing that gets me is the assumption that this is an issue for people. While I might be able to get my beer ready faster than I do, it is one of my lowest priorities. I'm not losing anything by waiting, so why risk it? Great beer is great beer, even if it was in the primary a month.

 

[bob1852]

OP, your post would've been better if you didn't imply people who primary for four weeks are rediculous.

 

[mikeysab]

Point taken. Here's a little info for the discussion.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/aging-beer-facts-myths-discussion-84005/

I get what you're saying about not listening to people on when their beers SHOULD be done, but rather relying on the beer itself to let you know when it's done. I also know that you're right about beers being done in 10 days. I've done it, and a lot of others have also. I'm not so sure that people are really pushing the idea that 4 weeks is the only way to make good beer. I don't think it can hurt though, but that's just my opinion. The beer myths thread is a helpful one, but like you said yourself, personal experience weighs more than any thread we can read online.

Your delivery is what threw people off a bit. Obviously, you're trying to help, and your post will probably help some new brewers rely on the beer, and not the posts, to let them know when it's done. Let's face it, there's many ways to make beer,some that are more convenient than others. Like some have said, ask ten brewers how to make beer and you'll get 10 different answers. (okay, that's an abortion of a quote I read somewhere). Bottom line is, it's all about the beer.

 

[mikeysab]

Thanks, ya got me in trouble with my wife. Upon laughing hysterically at your picture, her response was "You're raughing at my peopre"

 

[RCCOLA]

I get what you're saying about not listening to people on when their beers SHOULD be done, but rather relying on the beer itself to let you know when it's done. I also know that you're right about beers being done in 10 days. I've done it, and a lot of others have also. I'm not so sure that people are really pushing the idea that 4 weeks is the only way to make good beer. I don't think it can hurt though, but that's just my opinion. The beer myths thread is a helpful one, but like you said yourself, personal experience weighs more than any thread we can read online.

Your delivery is what threw people off a bit. Obviously, you're trying to help, and your post will probably help some new brewers rely on the beer, and not the posts, to let them know when it's done. Let's face it, there's many ways to make beer,some that are more convenient than others. Like some have said, ask ten brewers how to make beer and you'll get 10 different answers. (okay, that's an abortion of a quote I read somewhere). Bottom line is, it's all about the beer.

I appreciate this post. That's what I was getting at. Don't listen to what I'm saying, don't listen to what anyone is saying. Listen to what the beer--and your senses are telling you.

 

[hbtasdfg]

I think this is a good question. I am more amateur (6 batches in 7 years) and what I noticed was that when I bottled after fermentation stopped dead plus a few days (2 weeks) I got a pretty good product. When I left it longer I had it go bad, and I think the problem was my equipment was subpar which let oxygen contaminate it.

There are obvious benefits to longer time in primary like settling and clearing more and yeast cleaning up the flavor. I think a good way to look at it is that bottling once you are sure your primary fermentation is over (stable gravity in expected range for a few days) ensures that you avoid oxygen contamination and get a decent product if you are more amateur or have subpar equipment, but more time pays off if you really understand what you are doing and follow best practices meticulously.

 

[nukinfuts29]

Thanks, ya got me in trouble with my wife. Upon laughing hysterically at your picture, her response was "You're raughing at my peopre"

mines yelling at me too, i'm supposed to be helping with the christmas cookies and not "attacking special people on my stupid beer forum" LOL

 

[helibrewer]

Well I happen to think that the terms are a bit jacked up. Primary Fermentation ends when the yeast has converted all the fermentable products into alcohol and CO2...there is no way to define this as a "time"...it's done when the yeast are done. Unless you want to call bottle carbonation secondary fermentation beer is not put through a secondary fermentation process (with the exception of some bacterial treatments); it lagers, ages, conditions, or whatever else you want to call it but it is not secondary fermentation.

We mix up the storage vessel with the biologic process. You can rack the beer into a different container every day once it starts to ferment if you want but it is still primary fermentation.

By leaving the beer alone after primary fermentation is complete we are aging the beer...there is a lot of chemistry going on at this time which in many cases is improving on the beers flavor, but it is not secondary fermentation.

So new guys should:
1) Understand when primary fermentation ends and how to determine that, and
2) Realize that aging their beer can improve it and the only way to determine that is to regularly taste it throughout the aging period. When it tastes good, bottle or keg it.
3) Realize that bottle carbonation starts the process over again (lag phase, exponential growth phase, conditioning phase). This takes time, again determined by the yeast, not the clock.

Understanding what is going on in 1,2, and 3 above helps to understand why some beers can take weeks or months (and in some cases years) to be their best.

My .02

 

[mikeysab]

woo hoo, I have two HBT friends, a gun toting penguin and a guy holding a fish. I just hope the penguin isn't using me for the other guy to get to his fish.

 

[gr8shandini]

Although the OP could have stated his opinion more diplomatically, I'm inclined to step in and defend the idea at least. If you're talking average gravity ales, one doesn't need to be a superhuman brewer with a $15,000 setup to turn around a perfectly good product in two weeks. I generally primary mine for about that long before cold crashing and packaging. Since I keg and force carb, I can start pulling samples pretty shortly after that. It's been my experience that if it tastes good out of the fermenter, there is only a slight improvement until about the three week mark at which point it remains stable for as long as I've had a keg around. Add another week or two for something like a stout or a porter which seems to need the extra time to mellow. YMMV, of course, so I wouldn't say that someone is ridiculous for doing a month long primary.

However, what gets me a little worked up is when a new brewer posts that they're having a problem with an off-flavor and the vocal minority invariably chimes in with "it's still green! Wait longer next time." I remember one thread where the OP was trying to trace a consistent problem across all his beers including one that was in primary for 8 weeks and bottle conditioned for another 6. Still, the most common response he got was "green beer." That's not being helpful at all.

What would be helpful is if people would say "it sounds like you're tasting X which is usually caused by Y and can be avoided by doing A, B, and/or C next time around. As a fix, however, you can let it age a little and your off flavor won't be as pronounced."

In the end, saying that a primary MUST be 4 weeks long is just as arbitrary as the much derided 1-2-3 schedule recommended by most kits.

 

[el_caro]

Unless you want to call bottle carbonation secondary fermentation beer is not put through a secondary fermentation process (with the exception of some bacterial treatments); it lagers, ages, conditions, or whatever else you want to call it but it is not secondary fermentation.

My .02

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

 

[ZamaMan]

Good thing we had you OP. We almost wasted a couple weeks of our beers life. You should probably tell john Palmer and Jamil that so they can learn!

Breweries have to turn around there batches quickly for profit so yeah they move fast through large pitches and filtration to get rid of yeast flavors ect. If the average home brewer doesnt filter to speed up conditioning than an extra week or two in the primary is beneficial for flavor. Bringing up the temp of the fermentor at the end of fermentation can speed that time up yeah but for the average homebrewer the 3-4 week in prkmary advice is very sound.

 

[ZamaMan]

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

Palmer and Jamil both recommend not secondarying the beer

 

[Brulosopher]

If you like your beer less that it could be. Go for it.
I go with the more vocal few
I have noticed that the beer that I don't rush IS NOTICEABLY better!!!!!

Amen.

 

[mikeysab]

Well, if anyone is brewing according to brew kit instructions, then you should be throwing those instructions in the garbage. IMHO, people say to let it sit for 4 weeks because that is their experience, and it works for them. Most people don't know the reason why they do it, but they know it works. In my experience, most of my beers have benefited from a bit of time on the yeast to condition and mature a bit. That's not to say that those beers wouldn't have been just as good if I bottled at 2 weeks instead of four, but it works for me, and I feel comfortable doing it.

Now, if I WANT or NEED to have a beer in 2 weeks, then I'll do it. I'm not going to brew a RIS and expect it to be ready in that time, but I"ll brew a blonde or a cream ale, pale ale, or a wheat beer of 1.060 or less and totally expect it to be done in 2 weeks. I did BM's centennial blonde and went grain to glass in 2 weeks, and that's bottle carbing. It was ready for a family function and it went over great. But if I'm doing an Imperial chocolate cherry oak aged double oatmeal breakfast russian irish red india pale stout, I"m certainly gonna leave myself a bit of time for it to come into its own.

Like the OP said, if you taste a beer at ten days, or seven or 30, and you feel comfortable bottling it, then go for it. Just because I say that it should sit on the yeast for another week doesn't mean $hit, it's just my experience. I'd love to get every beer I brew into a bottle or keg after 10 days, but I tend to brew beers that do need time on the yeast. I don't brew very many hefes, creams or blondes. And even if I did, unless I needed them ready for a function, I'd leave them anyway. I'm a fat, lazy piece of crap that hates bottling, so 4 weeks to me is a no brainer. Hey, I gotta bottle it sooner or later.

 

[alestateyall]

and so begins yet another topic on this dead horse of a subject....

+1

 

[helibrewer]

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

The key phrase he uses is phase of fermentation. I would argue that conditioning is the tertiary phase of fermentation which actually partialy overlaps the exponential growth phase of primary fermentation. A true secondary fermentation would be something like malolactic fermentation in red wine where O. oeni is introduced to convert malic acid to lactic acid.
S. cerevisiae (beer and wine yeast) has multiple phases of one primary fermentation.

 

[Brulosopher]

I get what you're saying about not listening to people on when their beers SHOULD be done, but rather relying on the beer itself to let you know when it's done. I also know that you're right about beers being done in 10 days. I've done it, and a lot of others have also. I'm not so sure that people are really pushing the idea that 4 weeks is the only way to make good beer. I don't think it can hurt though, but that's just my opinion. The beer myths thread is a helpful one, but like you said yourself, personal experience weighs more than any thread we can read online.

Your delivery is what threw people off a bit. Obviously, you're trying to help, and your post will probably help some new brewers rely on the beer, and not the posts, to let them know when it's done. Let's face it, there's many ways to make beer,some that are more convenient than others. Like some have said, ask ten brewers how to make beer and you'll get 10 different answers. (okay, that's an abortion of a quote I read somewhere). Bottom line is, it's all about the beer.

Kudos on taking a more neutral approach. While I have my own opinions on this issue, I don't see the point in beating the dude up for trying to help. If you fight fire with fire, well...

It IS all about the beer.