Hi everyone - I'm a newbie to this site and have a question about racking to my secondary. My very first brew (Northern Brewer American Wheat) has been in primary for 2-weeks and it's done fermenting. The recipe says that I can go straight from primary into bottling but should I consider racking it into my secondary and letting it sit for a week? If the recipe doesn't call should I do it anyway? I know that secondary helps to clear the beer, etc. but I'm kind of anxious to get this stuff bottled, LOL. Any advice that you guys could provide would really be appreciated. I don't want to screw up my first brew! Thanks everyone. I'm glad that I came across this site and look forward to learning as much as I can about my new obsession.
Newbie Here - Is a Secondary Fermentation Necessary??
- Thread starter thorn054
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Hi and welcome to HBT !
Secondary fermentation is definitely not mandatory. If you have the same F.G. reading for a couple of days then it is time to bottle.
I use secondaries because I clear my beer with gelatin before kegging, but that's another story. You'll find many people are against/pro secondaries on this forum.. interesting debate.
Cheers !
Secondary fermentation is definitely not mandatory. If you have the same F.G. reading for a couple of days then it is time to bottle.
I use secondaries because I clear my beer with gelatin before kegging, but that's another story. You'll find many people are against/pro secondaries on this forum.. interesting debate.
Cheers !
ABVIBUSRM
Well-Known Member
No secondary is not necessary but can be useful for certain beers..i only use secondaries to free up my primaries
ndinh
Well-Known Member
When I first started, I was racking into secondary for everything. I noticed that my IPA's were good but not great and were getting oxidized fast. Not sure if that was the reason or just my inexperience way of transferring. Recently, I've found that keeping IPA's in primary only and then sending it directly to a purged keg, thus reducing O2 exposure, produces a much better beer by 100%. I still rack to secondary but only with Belgians because they tend to take 1+ months to ferment.
mrgrimm101
Well-Known Member
Secondaries can be helpful when adding special ingredients such as spices or fruit. It can also be good when aging for a long period of time. When I first started I used secondarys a lot, but typically I don't secondary anymore. I was getting very oxidized beer when I transferred (mostly because I was doing it incorrectly). I brewed a pumpkin porter a couple weeks ago and I will transfer that one so the beer doesn't sit on the pumpkin for too long. Plus I am going to add vanilla extract to the beer, and I am going to do that after I transfer to secondary.
flars
Well-Known Member
secondaries are not needed, especially for a wheat beer. wheat beers are meant to be hazy.
To help clear just leave it in the primary another week. But then I understand Wheats don't really clear, but I could be wrong.
I don't know that a secondary, specifically, helps clear a beer at all. If you want to clear a beer (other than filtering), the best method would be to simply drop the temperature fairly dramatically and let anything in suspension drop out of it.... and to do that, it doesn't have to be in a different vessel.
I think the only time a secondary is truly beneficial is if the beer is going to be aged for any significant amount of time (and that amount of time is a topic of debate and personal preference). For me, I don't like beers to sit in primary longer than a month. If the beer needs to sit longer than that due to simply aging requirements or the addition of anything "to secondary", I rack the beer off the yeast cake.
... and that is really the reason for secondary at all... to remove the yeast cake from the beer as the longer the beer sits on a spent yeast cake, the greater the possibilities are that it''ll develop off flavors.
So... for your situation... no... there is no reason (in my opinion) to rack it to a secondary. The total time it'll be on the yeast, as is the case with most wheats, is very short and there is no real risk there. The haze in it, due to it being a wheat beer, is irrelevant when talking about primary vs secondary as again... clarity is either a time or temperature-driven attribute as opposed to the beer simply being in a different container.
Yup, I'm glad this myth is finally going away. I don't even secondary to add dry hops or stuff like spices unless its a lot of solid matter going in.
I've only ever done 2 secondaries. One was a cucumber-mint saison, racked onto several pounds of fresh cukes and mint sprigs. Another was an apple cinnamon brown ale, racked onto 6 sliced apples and a gallon of cider to referment.
I've only ever done 2 secondaries. One was a cucumber-mint saison, racked onto several pounds of fresh cukes and mint sprigs. Another was an apple cinnamon brown ale, racked onto 6 sliced apples and a gallon of cider to referment.
I do everything in primary including dry hopping. I do a 4 week primary and after a week chilling in the bottle I always get Crystal clear beer. Wheats are supposed to be hazy, and are good young, so I would bottle after a 3 week primary. You could probably bottle now but another week might help.
Also, if your bottle priming give it 3 weeks at room temp. Most directions say 1-2 weeks which isn't enough.
Also, if your bottle priming give it 3 weeks at room temp. Most directions say 1-2 weeks which isn't enough.
Like several of the above posters, many of us that started brewing during a certain time period religiously used to rack to a secondary because 'that's the way it's done'. Then through a combination of reading multiple(a ton of multiples) posts, and personal experience, most of us don't rack that often anymore.
Here's when I do:
1. I'm going to lager or cold condition something for more than 3 weeks, after fermentation is finished.
2. I desperately need that yeast cake that's sitting at the bottom of my bucket and the beer above it has only been there for 2 weeks or less and is still cloudier than I want it to be. However, ONLY if I'm sure it's completely finished fermenting.
Adding extra fermentables, dryhopping, cold crashing and adding gelatin- I do that all in primary now. It's just easier.
By the way- IMO the term 'secondary fermenter' should be retired except for those rare conditions where you are adding extra fermentables. There shouldn't be any fermentation happening(with the possible exception of true lagering). I prefer the term 'cold conditioning'. But that's my personal pet peeve.
Here's when I do:
1. I'm going to lager or cold condition something for more than 3 weeks, after fermentation is finished.
2. I desperately need that yeast cake that's sitting at the bottom of my bucket and the beer above it has only been there for 2 weeks or less and is still cloudier than I want it to be. However, ONLY if I'm sure it's completely finished fermenting.
Adding extra fermentables, dryhopping, cold crashing and adding gelatin- I do that all in primary now. It's just easier.
By the way- IMO the term 'secondary fermenter' should be retired except for those rare conditions where you are adding extra fermentables. There shouldn't be any fermentation happening(with the possible exception of true lagering). I prefer the term 'cold conditioning'. But that's my personal pet peeve.
I am one of the ones who still use secondaries....BUT the beer goes from primary to a secondary and directly to the cold crash fridge. I leave almost no beer between primary secondary and keg... I also pick up near zero trub into my kegs.....BUT I think it is probably an unnecessary step and just what I am used to doing.
mrgrimm101
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I prefer to call it a "secondary vessel" rather than "secondary fermenter."
mrgrimm101
Well-Known Member
From what I read, this is and was always the main reason to transfer to a secondary vessel. However, I also read that with the yeast strains that are available today (as opposed to 10 or 20 years ago) this really isn't a huge concern anymore.
MyCarHasAbs
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
- Messages
- 587
- Reaction score
- 93
I'll be making a Mint Chocolate Stout for xmas time this year and plan on brewing it in a few weeks. The ABSOLUTE ONLY reason I'll be racking to secondary for this time is to let it age for an additional 3-4 weeks. I'll be adding mint leaves that have been soaked in vodka for a couple weeks to place in there for secondary. If it weren't for the extra aging I wouldn't even bother.
metanoia
Well-Known Member
Exactly. 20 years ago, people like my dad were homebrewing with the crappy pre-packaged kits in a cylinder container, where the packet of yeast taped to the top of the lid was God-knows how old. Add in the fact that the yeast strains back then were much less healthy than what's available today (even in dry yeast), and you had a recipe for autolysis, where the less-than-hearty yeast cells would die much easier and breakdown, releasing off-flavors in your beer. Back then a secondary made sense, and was rather necessary, but with the hearty yeasties we use today, the opposite is true- leaving the beer on the yeast cake for an extra few weeks or even a few months will do nothing but help clean up the beer, creating an even better end-product.
If anyone ever suggests using a secondary for no good reason (aging/adding fruit), you can assume that they've been doing it that way for 20+ years or learned from someone who used to homebrew in the 90s.
Last edited:
.......... or are following kit instructions, which 90% of the time seem to say to rack to secondary after 7-10 days and bottle after 2 weeks. Very frustrating.
You beat me to this point. I asked this same question a few weeks ago about racking to a secondary and received the same responses. Are the instructions just holding on to the past? It seems like racking to a secondary increases the risk of a bad batch either through excessive air or increasing the risk of contamination; therefore the sellers would want to get this out of there instructions to increase the number of satisfied customers. At the least it's confusing for us newbies.
Not to derail but...
I made a cucumber-mint saison with whole mint leaves and just thought I'd give you my experience. I used whole mint leaves that you can buy at like whole foods. I just dunked them branch in starsan then plucked the leaves and dropped em in. I'd guess I used maybe 20 regular sized leaves for a 5gal batch, let them sit for 5 days like a dry hop. Mint flavor came through in a huge way. It took about a month to get to where I wanted it, but I'm glad I overshot it by a bit since I didnt want it fading out too fast. Anyway, just my advice, I wouldn't think you'd need the vodka extraction. That could be too strong, but it depends on how many leaves too...
Probably a couple of factors, as well as holding on to the past. Recommending secondary fermenters allows brew supply places....... to sell secondary fermenters, which is more sales to new brewers. As far as the whole short time frame thing goes, telling all new brewers to age for 4 weeks may be daunting, as most of us wanted to get to drinking our beer as fast as possible when we first started.
metanoia
Well-Known Member
I'd say that falls under learning to homebrew from someone who started in the 90s, in that the instructions are likely heavily influenced by such a person/mentality.
Similar threads
