Transfer to secondary too soon?

[Husher]

I racked a beer after 6 days without checking the hydrometer. If I plan on keeping in the secondary for a minimum of 3 weeks, is there any harm in what I did?

Thanks

 

[celticcolorado]

No problem, your fine

 

[lumpher]

if you rack too soon, you greatly reduce the amount of yeast in the beer. it never has a chance to clean up after itself, so might not taste quite right. it may not even have been done fermenting, since you didn't take a reading. depending on the type of beer, i've had it ferment up to a month. many of us let the beer ferment for around 3 weeks (unless it's quick, like a mild or hefe) in the primary, then keg or bottle

 

[IFMracin]

Depends.
Might be fine, might get stuck fermentation.
Just watch it, and take some readings in a week or two.

 

[Husher]

I should add that it was a Black Rock canned beer kit with half a liter of liquid malt extract. Fermentation was very strong after 8 hours (never seen that before and I've done 7-8 batches). Airlock activity was gone after 4 days.

 

[KISS Brew]

Airlock activity was gone after 4 days.

Keep in mind that airlock activity doesn't really indicate anything - you really should have taken a hydrometer sample.

I probably would not have moved to a secondary at all. However, it's my understanding that if you do choose to do this, you really must do it after fermentation has nearly completed.

 

[COLObrewer]

Keep in mind that airlock activity doesn't really indicate anything - you really should have taken a hydrometer sample.

I probably would not have moved to a secondary at all. However, it's my understanding that if you do choose to do this, you really must do it after fermentation has nearly completed.

+1, except I would delete the word nearly.

 

[stratslinger]

I'd agree with everyone else; you're probably OK, but in the future it's best to take hydrometer readings and make sure you're at (or very near) your FG before you rack to secondary, if you're going to rack at all. And do yourself a favor and do some research on here about racking; there's some very strong research to show that there's very little to be gained from that process, and in fact there are arguably some unnecessary risks involved, unless you're adding something like dry hops, wood, or fruit... Even Palmer, who most of us learned about Secondaries from, has gone back and reversed his stance at this point. There's interesting reading out there!

 

[Husher]

Even Palmer, who most of us learned about Secondaries from, has gone back and reversed his stance at this point.

Seriously? Palmer's online book was the reason I was transferring to a secondary after a few weeks! I read three was the limit.

I was in a rush to get it transferred so I could start another batch and I had little time to do it in. It was either do it or wait 2 weeks. And I through it was day 7 or 8, not 6, so I messed up there.

From this point I'll be aging stuff for some time (two batches in secondary, new batch in primary). I imagine this stuff can sit (at least a month) until I have free bottles and I need to carbonate.

Thanks

 

[pjj2ba]

Your beer will be perfectly fine. It is the yeast that are in suspension that are doing the active fermentation so a stuck fermentation is unlikely. The danger of a stuck fermentation is really only likely if you happen to use one of the highly flocculating yeast, which are already notorious for stuck fermentations, even when no secondary is used.

The only real drawback of too early a rack it that you will have more yeast then normal in your secondary. One of the major reasons to use a secondary is to allow bulk aging off of the yeast cake. If you rack to early, then you defeat part of the reason to using a secondary. It won't ruin your beer though, it will just be a little different, emphasis on the little, which may or not matter to you.

 

[pabloj13]

Seriously? Palmer's online book was the reason I was transferring to a secondary after a few weeks! I read three was the limit.

I was in a rush to get it transferred so I could start another batch and I had little time to do it in. It was either do it or wait 2 weeks. And I through it was day 7 or 8, not 6, so I messed up there.

From this point I'll be aging stuff for some time (two batches in secondary, new batch in primary). I imagine this stuff can sit (at least a month) until I have free bottles and I need to carbonate.

Thanks

Palmer has since updated his stance. See here.

 

[Husher]

If you rack to early, then you defeat part of the reason to using a secondary. It won't ruin your beer though, it will just be a little different, emphasis on the little, which may or not matter to you.

So by a little different, you mean colour/clarity of the beer, not taste right? I'm assuming the biggest impact is that the 'beer gets clear', but that beer that ages on the yeast cake don't taste any different right?

 

[Husher]

Also, I do plan on dry hopping but was going to age for 5-6 weeks in the primary and then toss some pellets in for the last week prior to bottling. That bad?

 

[Husher]

Palmer has since updated his stance. See here.

Thanks for the link. Read it through. Here's a question: Palmer noted that 20 years ago 'homebrewers were using with a single packet of dry yeast that was taped to the top of the can. There weren't as many liquid yeast cultures available.....So the whole health and vitality of yeast was different back then compared to know. Back then [Using a secondary] made sense. '.

So does that mean if I'm using the dry yeast that came with the can, it's not as robust as the liquid stuff, and I should secondary after three weeks? Or has dry yeast gotten better in 20 years?

Thanks again.

 

[KISS Brew]

So does that mean if I'm using the dry yeast that came with the can, it's not as robust as the liquid stuff, and I should secondary after three weeks? Or has dry yeast gotten better in 20 years?

You shouldn't be getting your beer ingredients out of a can. Lots of homebrew stores carry fresh extract that will beat canned extract by a mile.

Even if you do use a can, you shouldn't be using the yeast that comes with it. Every homebrew store should have some dry packets of US-05, which is an awesome all-around yeast for only $3.50. The improvement in beer is worth twice that.

With all that said, even if you're using canned extract and the dry yeast that came with it, I don't think a secondary is necessary or desirable. I believe (but cannot back this up) that even that dry yeast has improved since 20 years ago.

 

[pabloj13]

Thanks for the link. Read it through. Here's a question: Palmer noted that 20 years ago 'homebrewers were using with a single packet of dry yeast that was taped to the top of the can. There weren't as many liquid yeast cultures available.....So the whole health and vitality of yeast was different back then compared to know. Back then [Using a secondary] made sense. '.

So does that mean if I'm using the dry yeast that came with the can, it's not as robust as the liquid stuff, and I should secondary after three weeks? Or has dry yeast gotten better in 20 years?

Thanks again.

I wouldn't use the stuff with the can. I would use either liquid with a starter or a known dry yeast like S-04/05, Notty, etc.

I don't secondary at all unless I am dry hopping, adding fruit, or storing in bulk for months. Since you tranferred your already I would take some hydrometer readings to see if it is done. Once it is stable and it tastes good, you can package.

 

[pjj2ba]

So by a little different, you mean colour/clarity of the beer, not taste right? I'm assuming the biggest impact is that the 'beer gets clear', but that beer that ages on the yeast cake don't taste any different right?

No, I mean taste. I've noticed this myself and this was the conclusion of the article in BYO. There were small taste differences and the testers were evenly split as to which they preferred.

BYO article