why is conditioning heavy brews so important?

[quadbikerjosh]

why is it so important to let your beers just sit and condition for so long? what exactly is going on when you let them condition after fermentation? especialy the heavier beers. why does this mateer? i know it needs to be done, just not why.

 

[Golddiggie]

If you're talking about the long primary time, it's more to make sure that the yeast has the time it needs to both ferment all it can, and clean up after itself. Plus, leaving it on the cake longer lets the brew get clearer on it's own without needing to cold crash or rack. IMO racking to get a brew to clear is like driving north to go south. Leaving the brew alone, not disturbing it, will get it to clear out really well.

IME, even mosted OG/ABV brews benefit from longer primary times. I have a cream ale brewed on 2/26 that is getting bottled this weekend. It's been on the yeast for the entire time. I have an ESB that I started on 3/10 that I dry hopped last night and it will be bottled up on 4/7... A month really is the minimum amount of time for me now... Getting really great brews, that are very clear (helps to pick yeast that with decent flocculation ratings).

Also, more time will typically allow bigger brews to meld and mellow out. Sometimes this is needed, sometimes not... If it's a really high ABV brew, it will probably need time so that it's not so 'hot' tasting...

BTW, it's not so much heavy brews, as big brews... You can have a lower FG big brew that's not 'heavy' but it's still potent...

 

[ayoungrad]

why is it so important to let your beers just sit and condition for so long? what exactly is going on when you let them condition after fermentation? especialy the heavier beers. why does this mateer? i know it needs to be done, just not why.

Are you asking about primary? Or are you asking about bottle conditioning? I have never made a barley wine but apparently they are supposed to sit for months in bottles.

Either way, I think the reasons are similar to those already stated. Mellowing of alcohol and blending of flavors. I've seen someone draw a parallel to how some foods taste better after mellowing in the frig overnight compared with when they are first made.

I think the downside of a long bottle conditioning time is related to oxidation. But this is something I'm only just starting to learn more about.

 

[quadbikerjosh]

wow, all things i was un-aware of. i have still been having clarity issues even tho ive been using a wort chiller, irish moss, secondary, etc. so maybe this is the key to why my brews have been foggy. ive had to use knox gelitain to clarify latly, i hate the idea of adding something that smells like hoof to my beer.

potent brews that are lighter you say??? how is this acomplished? i am intruiged haha

 

[Golddiggie]

wow, all things i was un-aware of. i have still been having clarity issues even tho ive been using a wort chiller, irish moss, secondary, etc. so maybe this is the key to why my brews have been foggy. ive had to use knox gelitain to clarify latly, i hate the idea of adding something that smells like hoof to my beer.

potent brews that are lighter you say??? how is this acomplished? i am intruiged haha

Before you resort to racking to a bright tank, or using gelatin, try leaving the brew in primary for longer. I go 4-6+ weeks without even blinking. I'm even dry hopping in primary right now (1oz of whole hops went in last night)...

Higher ABV brews that are not dark is damned easy... You just don't add dark specialty grains/malts to the brew. Check out the recipe's under my profile (click on the 'Recipe' item to the left, you'll see a couple listed for now, more coming)... My old ale (Dirty Old Man) has a color of ~18.7, with an ABV of over 8% (think it was closer to 8.5-9% since my OG reading is suspect due to not mixing in the top-off water well)... Came out really nice too (damned great brew IMO)... My honey cream ale (about to be bottled up) is in the 6.5% ABV area (could hit 7%, haven't taken the final reading yet) with a color of just 7... I have a wee heavy that's in the area of 7% ABV, with a color of just 14.2... Looked damned good when I put it onto the oak cubes last week.

Using software to help you figure out a recipe is key IMO... It allows you to get the mix of flavors, characteristics, and reach your color target area much easier. You could be amazed at how much difference a few ounces more, or less, of a dark malt makes (flavors, color, etc.)...

I will be posting more of the recipes I'm really happy with as time goes by... Such as my ESB (dry hopped last night), and more that I'm working on...

 

[quadbikerjosh]

well that could explain alot. i just kegged my american IPA and it was cloudier then seattle in hell, so this is probably why. it only spent two weeks in the primary. but ive got a boston lager sitting in my primary right now, ill let it go for 4 or 5 more weeks and see what i get

as for software for brewing, where can i find this? ive never heard of it. i also need to learn what the color scale is, or how to calculate bitterness etc. i think this stuff will help me make awsome brews as oposed to just different beers.

ayoungrad > i meant in general weather its in primary, secondary, or bottling.

 

[Revvy]

So they don't taste like crap, like they do when they are first made, and burn going down...so they are actually worth drinking and don't taste like rocket fuel....

*shrug*

(This thread is exactly why ANY beer, especially big ones, need to condition.)

 

[Golddiggie]

For brewing software (since Revvy has spoken again, I'll leave that alone ) I use Beer Smith... There are other apps out there for either installation on your system, or use via web pages. I like Beer Smith for a few reasons...

1. I can install it onto TWO of my computers with the same license purchased. They actually tell you this up front.
2. It has a ton of tools, functions and features to help any level of home brewer out.
3. I don't think it's all that difficult to figure out how to use it.
4. You can try it out, for free, for 21 days before deciding if you want to pay the $21.95 for the dual system license.
5. You can print out brew sheets to really help your brew day along.

Using software you can punch in your hops, grains, malts, etc. and it will help you to figure out what you'll get. With most of them you can select a style that you want to brew, and they show you the style ranges for things like OG, FG, color and IBU... It will let you know when something is outside of the range too. The color it shows you is pretty accurate for what you'll see in the glass. Ignore what's in the fermenter, for color. You can also select your mash options/preferences (when going all grain, or partial mash) and it will help you with how much water you need, and at what temps to hit your targets.

I picked up Beer Smith around my third batch... It's been a huge help, to me... I can only imaging how much more of a pain it would have been to figure the recipes out the old way (by hand)... Hop calculations alone were enough to give me more gray hair. Now I can simply tweak a recipe at will and see the effect those changes have.

Best $21.95 I've spent (so far) for home brewing...

 

[remilard]

why is it so important to let your beers just sit and condition for so long? what exactly is going on when you let them condition after fermentation? especialy the heavier beers. why does this mateer? i know it needs to be done, just not why.

Because you have fermented them poorly and they have flaws such as fusel alcohols.

This may make you wonder: why not just ferment them correctly so they are flaw free when young? That's a good question.

Nothing wrong with aging a barleywine or RIS but if you can't make a 9% IIPA that tastes good at 4 weeks from brew day then you have a lot of room for improvement.

 

[Golddiggie]

Because you have fermented them poorly and they have flaws such as fusel alcohols.

This may make you wonder: why not just ferment them correctly so they are flaw free when young? That's a good question.

Nothing wrong with aging a barleywine or RIS but if you can't make a 9% IIPA that tastes good at 4 weeks from brew day then you have a lot of room for improvement.

Ok, that post makes you sound like a total yakass...

1. Not everyone has the space, or funds, for a fermentation chamber to make something faster than it would otherwise take. There is NOTHING wrong with taking more time allowing your brew to become GREAT...

2. IMO IIPA's taste like ass covered in citric acid... Chances of you finding me drinking one that's not aged for a year, or more, is slim to nil. Same with any high IBU brew...

3. With point #1, you could need more time to get a higher ABV brew to come into GREATNESS... I'm not looking for just 'good' brews, I want GREAT ones. If that means giving it more time on the yeast, then I will. If that means aging it on some oak for a while, then I will.

To think that just because someone doesn't pump out brews like clockwork makes them a poor home brewer is just wrong.

For the record, my brews taste 'good' after just a couple of weeks, depending on what I'm making and such... But, they are GREAT once I give them more time. I'm more than willing to let them take the time to become great.

If you can produce beyond great brews in a matter of a couple of weeks, and you're not a head brewer someplace, why aren't you??

Also, for those of us that haven't been home brewing for decades, your comments are flat out insulting. Those of us that haven't been able to invest thousands of dollars in creating climate controlled fermentation chambers that keep our wort within a fraction of a degree of target are also none to happy with your comments. Saying that it's done poorly because it's not done fast is also nigh on moronic... Doing the best you can with what you have for hardware counts for more than pushing out brew...

BTW, there's also nothing wrong with giving a brew the time it needs to develop into what you really want to drink... For me, that means giving it the time it needs. Be that 3-4 weeks (for brews under "9%"), or months.

You sound like the kind of person that would also try to push out an 18% ABV mead in a month, or two, and expect it to be great and for people to fall all over themselves to drink it...

 

[remilard]

If you can produce beyond great brews in a matter of a couple of weeks, and you're not a head brewer someplace, why aren't you??

TL;DR but to answer this, I make a lot more money than brewers do doing more comfortable work. Do you ask people who garden as a hobby why they don't head down to Florida for the next tomato harvest?

 

[remilard]

You sound like the kind of person that would also try to push out an 18% ABV mead in a month, or two, and expect it to be great and for people to fall all over themselves to drink it...

Oh and, that's not me, that's Curt Stock.

 

[Yooper]

Because you have fermented them poorly and they have flaws such as fusel alcohols.

This may make you wonder: why not just ferment them correctly so they are flaw free when young? That's a good question.

Nothing wrong with aging a barleywine or RIS but if you can't make a 9% IIPA that tastes good at 4 weeks from brew day then you have a lot of room for improvement.

I have to agree. I never keep anything in the fermenter more than three weeks, and usually it's more like two. Once it's clear, and finished, nothing good is going to happen in the fermenter.

However, I DO age my oaked imperial amber a bit- it's too "oaky" when it first comes out of secondary so it's bottled and is much better at about 4 months. Some beers need to "meld" a bit if they have complex flavors, like oak and other tannic ingredients.

I'm a winemaker. Big reds need time to age also, but lighter whites do not. Once they stop dropping lees, they are ready to bottle as well. A higher ABV drink may be "hot" at first and need time to mellow, but we're talking 13+%. Meads do take a bit of time, mostly because of the ABV. I'm not one to rush a mead.

I brewed an oatmeal stout last weekend (Saturday) and it was kegged today. It's a 4.5% ABV beer without much roast. It'll be really good in a week or two. I see no advantage to not kegging it.

An IPA is kegged at my house by week three. It's usually gone by week 6.

 

[Yooper]

1. Not everyone has the space, or funds, for a fermentation chamber to make something faster than it would otherwise take. There is NOTHING wrong with taking more time allowing your brew to become GREAT...

I also agree with this. There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking more time. Each of us does what works for us.

I'm just so sick of everybody jumping on the whole "leave it for a month or 6 weeks in primary" bandwagon. Sure, you can. But if it's well brewed, it's not necessary at all. It's just awesome for me that brewing is a pretty darn good hobby for a procrastinator!

Not too long ago, brewers were advised to "get the beer off of the yeast as soon as possible- in 5 days!" which is not necessarily the best practice. Now, brewers are told "if you're not waiting 6 weeks before packaging, it's too soon!" which is also not necessarily the best practice.

I think a middle ground is best, while recognizing that there is nothing really wrong with either school of thought. If the beer is clear, at FG, and had a small amount of time for a diacetyl rest, it can be packaged. It can also wait a bit, too.

I feel like Rodney King here- "can't we all get along?"

 

[sudsmcgee]

I'm just so sick of everybody jumping on the whole "leave it for a month or 6 weeks in primary" bandwagon. Sure, you can. But if it's well brewed, it's not necessary at all.

How does one brew better to shorten primary time?

 

[Yooper]

How does one brew better to shorten primary time?

There are a couple simple things- one of course is yeast health. Pitch the proper amount of yeast at the proper temperature. Keep fermentation temperatures in the optimum range for your yeast strain- then you won't have esters and fusels to have to "clean up" afterwards. Allow the beer to remain in primary for at least a couple of days after active fermentation finishes, ideally raising the temp a couple of degrees to encourage the yeast to finish up and clean up any diacetyl that may have been created. Brew a beer without astringency to begin with by paying attention to water temperature in the mash and sparge, water chemistry, ingredients (if you use a ton of black patent, it will take a while to mellow!), avoid oxidation after fermentation has begun, etc. Just regular old brewing techniques.

Once a beer is clear, and has been at FG for a few days, it's ready to be packaged. It can wait, even for weeks, without harm. But I also don't see the benefit.

Some yeast strains are highly flocculant, so you may have a bright beer in a week. Some are not, so sometimes finings or a technique such as cold crashing may work. In the case of a not-very-flocculant yeast, perhaps a longer time in primary may help.

The goal to me isn't a short, or a long, primary but an appropriate primary. Neither is wrong, but preaching that only one way is right is what I don't like to see.

 

[Mermaid]

In my limited experience, long bottle conditioning helps to correct for various types of "mistakes" (except for those that result in infection). The PM dubbel I brewed in August was almost undrinkable, it wasn't about being too potent, it just tasted "wrong" to me. I would suspect that I did not give it long enough primary and secondary fermentation, probably could have gone 4 weeks in primary and 4 weeks in secondary (it was a pretty big beer).
After aging for 6 months in the bottle, it's a much better brew, one I would not be afraid to share with friends. Also took damned near forever to carb up.
With some of my other less burly brews, bottle conditioning dries out the beer somewhat, which is also preferrable IMHO.

 

[sudsmcgee]

There are a couple simple things- one of course is yeast health. Pitch the proper amount of yeast at the proper temperature. Keep fermentation temperatures in the optimum range for your yeast strain- then you won't have esters and fusels to have to "clean up" afterwards. Allow the beer to remain in primary for at least a couple of days after active fermentation finishes, ideally raising the temp a couple of degrees to encourage the yeast to finish up and clean up any diacetyl that may have been created. Brew a beer without astringency to begin with by paying attention to water temperature in the mash and sparge, water chemistry, ingredients (if you use a ton of black patent, it will take a while to mellow!), avoid oxidation after fermentation has begun, etc. Just regular old brewing techniques.

Once a beer is clear, and has been at FG for a few days, it's ready to be packaged. It can wait, even for weeks, without harm. But I also don't see the benefit.

Some yeast strains are highly flocculant, so you may have a bright beer in a week. Some are not, so sometimes finings or a technique such as cold crashing may work. In the case of a not-very-flocculant yeast, perhaps a longer time in primary may help.

The goal to me isn't a short, or a long, primary but an appropriate primary. Neither is wrong, but preaching that only one way is right is what I don't like to see.

Thanks. That all makes sense and I kinda felt this was the case.