Will better brew techniques decrease conditioning time?

[duffman2]

Hey everyone. I just past my 1st brew anniversary and thought I'd do a little soul searching on how I approach this hobby of ours.
First of all, I do believe that almost all of my beers have turned out really, really well - eventually. The thing is, I'd say 8 out of ten batches have taken at least 3 to 4 months to condition from being an ok, drinkable beer to a blue ribbon wearing beer that everybody beats my door down to beg for a pint. And the problem is, that most of the time I only have maybe 6 or so bottles left when we realize that, holy crap, this beer is damn good!

So, for my self analysis - I brew as soundly as possible. My sanitation is still very good and I have not gotten an infection yet. I've been AG now for the last 10 batches maybe and I have a rectangular cooler to batch sparge with. I usually hit my mash temp just fine and it holds perfectly in the cooler. I do full boils and I don't usually have to use top off water. My vorlauf usually sucks, however. No matter how careful I vorlauf, I end up with a good amount of grain in my kettle. This grist goes through the boil and ends up in the bucket after cooling. Don't know if this is a big part of the problem or not.

Bottom line is this, my beers have turned out very good but it takes too damn long. Some recipes I have gotten from people out here were supposed to take the usual 3 weeks and then maybe a little while longer, but for me have taken up to 5 months! So, what do you guys think? Any tips on speeding up my conditioning time?

 

[DustinHickey]

Hi There,
Ive been brewing for some time but I'm sure others here know a bit about this more than me. Please feel free to correct me but I would take the best guess at the following.

I would say that some things can be done to reduce conditioning time but only involving certain factors. Some items just take time. Things like Pitching rates, OG, and temperature can effect the amount of "off" tasting byproducts that yeast produce when fermenting thus effecting how much time it takes for the remaining yeast to "clean up after themselves". For example, If you under pitch your wort you may put more strain on the yeast creating more byproducts and estery flavors that then need to be conditioned away. Items like this I would consider to be variables that we can control. There may be more but that is all I can think of at the time. Anyone else?

On the other hand, sometimes some ingredients just need more time to marry their flavors. Some of these would include the mellowing of hop bitterness,.... Thats all I got... Anyone else care to add?

Lastly, some items are dependent soley on the taster and or style of ale / beer / lager. Some people say they prefer hoppy beers a few weeks after brewing because they prefer the fresh hop bitterness. Others say they like the mellower hop profile of an aged IPA.

 

[duffman2]

Thanks Dustin.

I'm sure I could pitch more for my high gravity beers. So far I've only done a 2L starter twice, I think. And I have had slow fermentations and definitely more than a few stalled fermentations. I still get the 1.020 curse from time to time, but I've been able to warm and repitch to get some of them to drop a couple of points. I just had a breakfast stout start off at 1.078 and only drop to 1.034 - I even tried champagne yeast but it stuck there for a few weeks and didn't budge.

So, maybe this could help a bit?

 

[cheezydemon3]

Longer conditioning time IS a better brewing technique.

Do you think the stone vertical 090909 is supposed to be aged for 4 years because of deficiencies in their technique?

Patience is perhaps the best brewing skill you can have.

 

[DustinHickey]

Longer conditioning time IS a better brewing technique.

Do you think the stone vertical 090909 is supposed to be aged for 4 years because of deficiencies in their technique?

Patience is perhaps the best brewing skill you can have.

This usually depends on the beer style. The higher the alchohal / original gravity, the longer conditioning required. (rule of thumb, not always definative)

 

[SumnerH]

Longer conditioning time IS a better brewing technique.

Do you think the stone vertical 090909 is supposed to be aged for 4 years because of deficiencies in their technique?

Patience is perhaps the best brewing skill you can have.

On the other hand, lots of the big Belgians turn around _far_ faster than most home brewers are able to make a good BDSA.

Rochefort 10 is 20 days from grain to being on trucks headed for the stores (7 days in primary (68-73F), 3 days in a cold secondary (48F), 10 days in bottles at 73F, and it's sent out the door).

While we grumble about 3 weeks being a bit of a rush for a bottle-conditioned hefeweizen, some well-respected commercial breweries are regularly doing that with an 11.3% quadrupel.

Chimay, Achel, and Westmalle are on similar schedules.

Even Westvleteren is less than 2 months from grain to sale day.

Yeah, all of those will improve with age, but they're also perfectly good beers from the day of sale--much better than any similarly big beer I've brewed is at the 3 week or 2 month mark.

 

[DeathBrewer]

- Low alcohol content
- High pitching rates
- Shaking the vessel during fermentation
- High Flocculating Yeast
- Cold crashing techniques
- Force carbonation

If you are kegging, you can have a fantastic 10% Russian Imperial Stout ready in less than 2 months and get a low abv breakfast stout from grain to glass in a matter of days. It's just about knowing your ingredients and using proper techniques.

 

[duffman2]

you can have a fantastic 10% Russian Imperial Stout ready in less than 2 months and get a low abv breakfast stout from grain to glass in a matter of days.

Wow death, that's crazy! I don't keg everything however, and I've actually went back to bottles for most of the beers that I'm looking forward to the most.

 

[duffman2]

Longer conditioning time IS a better brewing technique.

Maybe, this is the only real answer. I'm really not anymore impatient than anybody else around here I suppose. And my number 1 goal now is to brew enough that I have something good and aged around to drink and give the other brews enough time to grow up and make something out of themselves!

But still, I was just making sure there wasn't anything I could do better in my process (brewing or fermenting) to condition my beers as quickly as they possibly can and not have to take any more time than they have to

 

[duffman2]

-
- Shaking the vessel during fermentation

Btw, I've never heard of shaking during fermentation. I thought oxygen was bad once you've started fermenting

 

[JNye]

Btw, I've never heard of shaking during fermentation. I thought oxygen was bad once you've started fermenting

i do this to help get the floaters to drop. i swirl for the most part. shouldn't be a problem because by the time i do it its filled with co2. maybe this is why DB does it too?

 

[Schnitzengiggle]

Btw, I've never heard of shaking during fermentation. I thought oxygen was bad once you've started fermenting

i do this to help get the floaters to drop. i swirl for the most part. shouldn't be a problem because by the time i do it its filled with co2. maybe this is why DB does it too?

When co2 levels rise enough it can become toxic to the yeast, so swirling, gently stirring or degassing can actually help the yeast attenuate fully, especially in higher gravity beers.

 

[ReverseApacheMaster]

The only other advice I would add to what deathbrewer said is if you are brewing a high gravity beer, it can speed up bottle conditioning if you add fresh yeast at bottling time so you aren't relying on the tired yeasts from fermentation to finish the job. Kind of like sending in reinforcements.

 

[cheezydemon3]

Commercial breweries filter and do things that most homebrewers cannot. But as has been said, just because they can be grain to bottle in 11 days, wouldn't it be better in 6 weeks? Maybe not if all of the active agents (yeast, etc.) have been filtered out, but otherwise, any brew will be better at 6 weeks.

I myself got tired of the last bottle from a batch tasting sooooo much better than the rest of it did.

The key is to have something else to drink, even if you have to buy it.

Put a sixer of each batch into a closet (preferably in a basement) and forget about it.

You will be convinced after you pull those out after 6 months and see what that brew could have been with some time.

 

[Zamial]

First of all...what do you guys think?

(condensed to save space...not distilled...)

Ok, Brew more/bigger batches. If you can not drink it before it is ready because you have to much then suddenly time is no longer the issue.

I see this entire problem as pipeline size problem, you just have not hit your "sweet spot" yet.

Isn't the reoccurring HB chant "RDWHAHB"? AKA, let it age?

If you are brewing 5 gallon batches looks like it is time to step it up to 10. doing 10? looks like you need to "double down" and brew the same batch x2's on brew day. You will probably not need to continuously do this, just until you get to where you are drinking the beer you want to "at its peak".

Well that is my $0.02.

GL!

:rockin:

 

[g-nome]

Originally Posted by cheezydemon3
Longer conditioning time IS a better brewing technique.

+1 on patience. A skill that most need to develop (especially me, 1 week after bottling). Pitch rates, pitch temp, aeration at pitching time, using the best quality and freshest liquid yeast all may help both your problematic stuck fermentations and bottle conditioning time. Try some less big beers to see if the problems are the same or if they change. I never have had problems with beers in the 1.030-1.070 range, but when I get bigger I have to take better care of the boys (yeasties that is) doing the heavy lifting.

 

[Zamial]

+1 on patience.

...or laziness mixed with procrastination is a really good 2nd choice...

 

[remilard]

Commercial breweries filter and do things that most homebrewers cannot. But as has been said, just because they can be grain to bottle in 11 days, wouldn't it be better in 6 weeks? Maybe not if all of the active agents (yeast, etc.) have been filtered out, but otherwise, any brew will be better at 6 weeks.

Russian River Pliny The Elder is unfiltered (and uncentrifuged in the pub), served in 3 weeks, and nobody thinks it is better in 6 weeks.

If you like aging your beer, fine. But if you can't, with VERY few exceptions, make good flaw free beer in an style in 4 weeks then there is a problem in your process that can be fixed without filtration or anything else not accessible to homebrewers. Kidding yourself about that will only hold you back.

 

[duffman2]

When co2 levels rise enough it can become toxic to the yeast, so swirling, gently stirring or degassing can actually help the yeast attenuate fully, especially in higher gravity beers.

Cool. Well, I have learned something then! I have swirled gently only when I'm trying to get the gravity down a bit more. Other than that, I leave it alone and just watch the temperature.

 

[duffman2]

The only other advice I would add to what deathbrewer said is if you are brewing a high gravity beer, it can speed up bottle conditioning if you add fresh yeast at bottling time so you aren't relying on the tired yeasts from fermentation to finish the job. Kind of like sending in reinforcements.

Ok, I've heard of this a bit but I haven't tried it. Do you just add a pack of safale to your bottling bucket with your sugar when you're about to rack? It almost sounds like a little expensive if you do this with all your beers but if you only do it to, say 1.060 and above beers, maybe this ain't too bad of an idea

 

[ReverseApacheMaster]

Russian River Pliny The Elder is unfiltered (and uncentrifuged in the pub), served in 3 weeks, and nobody thinks it is better in 6 weeks.

But that's only applicable to a handful of styles, e.g. wheats and IPAs.

If you like aging your beer, fine. But if you can't, with VERY few exceptions, make good flaw free beer in an style in 4 weeks then there is a problem in your process that can be fixed without filtration or anything else not accessible to homebrewers. Kidding yourself about that will only hold you back.

People aren't saying their beer is undrinkable at week four. They are saying it tastes better as it ages. Two very different things.

 

[ReverseApacheMaster]

Ok, I've heard of this a bit but I haven't tried it. Do you just add a pack of safale to your bottling bucket with your sugar when you're about to rack? It almost sounds like a little expensive if you do this with all your beers but if you only do it to, say 1.060 and above beers, maybe this ain't too bad of an idea

Yeah, just adding a very clean yeast. It is obviously an additional expense (unless you have washed yeast on hand) however as you point out, really only makes sense for bigger beers.

It's not that you can't depend upon the original yeast to carb and condition, but the extra support helps speed that along. So to that end, it's not a necessary step.

 

[Homercidal]

I agree that patience IS good homebrewing technique. It sounds like your brewing technique is sound, so I'd suggest double-checking the fermentation process, including amount of yeast pitched and temperature.

But what's the big deal? I you like your beer in a few months, then (if possible) get a pipeline going and rotate the bigger beers in when they are due, and brew some early beers to be had right away.

Even my quickest beers were MUCH better after a few more weeks.

 

[cheezydemon3]

Russian River Pliny The Elder is unfiltered (and uncentrifuged in the pub), served in 3 weeks, and nobody thinks it is better in 6 weeks.

If you like aging your beer, fine. But if you can't, with VERY few exceptions, make good flaw free beer in an style in 4 weeks then there is a problem in your process that can be fixed without filtration or anything else not accessible to homebrewers. Kidding yourself about that will only hold you back.

Good in 4 weeks, great in 6. Where is your confusion?

 

[Malticulous]

When I joined here some members has the audacity to call me a pedophile because I prefer fresh beer. Let them have their stale beer. If you can't make great beer in three weeks your doing something wrong or just wasting time.

 

[DeathBrewer]

To all: Your fermenter is PUMPING out co2 continuously during it's primary fermentation. After fermentation is completely done, there may be some concern for aeration (but little, the bottle is still full of co2 for some time.) During fermentation, however: shake it, spin it, splash it all you want. All you are doing is helping the yeast to further their potential. Old concerns were for open top fermenters (you know, the old cheese-cloth trick) and superstition due to over-concern of oxygen. As long as you have an airlock and it's bubbling, you're fine.

Commercial breweries filter and do things that most homebrewers cannot.

With a little innovation, homebrewers can do just about anything commercial brewers can do. We filter beer all the time.

But as has been said, just because they can be grain to bottle in 11 days, wouldn't it be better in 6 weeks? Maybe not if all of the active agents (yeast, etc.) have been filtered out, but otherwise, any brew will be better at 6 weeks.

Nope, it's about designing the beer to fit the schedule. Some beers are better fresh and are ideal for fast fermentation and no filtering, etc. For example, hefweizens and small stouts make fantastic fast beers.

I myself got tired of the last bottle from a batch tasting sooooo much better than the rest of it did.

This is certainly true for most homebrews and for natural carbonation using sugar. To go REALLY fast, you must keg. It is possible to have a good bottle-conditioned beer in about 3 weeks, grain to glass, but much tougher than with kegging and force-carbonation.

 

[cheezydemon3]

When I joined here some members has the audacity to call me a pedophile because I prefer fresh beer. Let them have their stale beer. If you can't make great beer in three weeks your doing something wrong or just wasting time.

again.....great beer in 3 weeks, incredible in 6.

I don't consider the 3 weeks a waste.

Pedophile? No......... Lush? maybe. If you have to guzzle all 5 gallons at the 3 week mark, then maybe YOU are the one with a problem.

 

[DustinHickey]

again.....great beer in 3 weeks, incredible in 6.

I don't consider the 3 weeks a waste.

Pedophile? No......... Lush? maybe. If you have to guzzle all 5 gallons at the 3 week mark, then maybe YOU are the one with a problem.

As stated above, depends on the style of beer. Hop longevity is usually the reason.

 

[duffman2]

To all: Your fermenter is PUMPING out co2 continuously during it's primary fermentation. During fermentation, however: shake it, spin it, splash it all you want. All you are doing is helping the yeast to further their potential.

Alright, cool. I had been coerced into fear about oxygen when I first began brewing. I knew that CO2 was pushing everything out, but was told that any o2 once fermentation started created off flavors. And I haven't heard anything different until about that until now. But, this does make a lot of sense and I'm hoping that this will help my yeasties do their job a little bit better!

 

[cheezydemon3]

To all: Your fermenter is PUMPING out co2 continuously during it's primary fermentation. After fermentation is completely done, there may be some concern for aeration (but little, the bottle is still full of co2 for some time.) During fermentation, however: shake it, spin it, splash it all you want. All you are doing is helping the yeast to further their potential. Old concerns were for open top fermenters (you know, the old cheese-cloth trick) and superstition due to over-concern of oxygen. As long as you have an airlock and it's bubbling, you're fine.



With a little innovation, homebrewers can do just about anything commercial brewers can do. We filter beer all the time.



Nope, it's about designing the beer to fit the schedule. Some beers are better fresh and are ideal for fast fermentation and no filtering, etc. For example, hefweizens and small stouts make fantastic fast beers.



This is certainly true for most homebrews and for natural carbonation using sugar. To go REALLY fast, you must keg. It is possible to have a good bottle-conditioned beer in about 3 weeks, grain to glass, but much tougher than with kegging and force-carbonation.

To be sure, I thought the OP was bottling. That is all I can speak to.

 

[duffman2]

Ok, so I can definitely try to nail my yeast pitching rates down better and try to rouse the yeast throughout the fermentation process to see if this helps.

Also, what about temps affecting the longer conditioning time? I use a swamp cooler, but down here in south Texas I have a hard time keeping my temps very consistent. And after a few days of fermenting, most of my brews end up in the upper 70's temperature range. I'm just trying to nail down what all might help out with my brew to glass time the most and be more efficient with my beers!

 

[Malticulous]

0123456789

 

[dfc]

When I joined here some members has the audacity to call me a pedophile because I prefer fresh beer. Let them have their stale beer. If you can't make great beer in three weeks your doing something wrong or just wasting time.

Pedophile.

 

[DeathBrewer]

Ok, so I can definitely try to nail my yeast pitching rates down better and try to rouse the yeast throughout the fermentation process to see if this helps.

Also, what about temps affecting the longer conditioning time? I use a swamp cooler, but down here in south Texas I have a hard time keeping my temps very consistent. And after a few days of fermenting, most of my brews end up in the upper 70's temperature range. I'm just trying to nail down what all might help out with my brew to glass time the most and be more efficient with my beers!

Your beer will ferment faster at higher temps but it will not taste as good. Don't sacrifice quality for time, try to keep your beers in the 60s.

 

[prosper]

for commercial brewers, time is money. IMO, this is a key advantage that we as homebrewers have: patience. I agree 1000% that long conditioning time IS a better brewing technique, even if beers can be good and drinkeable in short times, they will nearly always be *better* after 6+ weeks of conditioning.

 

[DeathBrewer]

When bottling, this is GENERALLY true. However, when kegging, you can have the highest quality beer in a much shorter time.

We've made a six-day steam beer that is as good as the original. I've had a stout ready in 4 that tasted fantastic and didn't get any better with age. It's all about technique (and kegging, obviously.)

Bottling with sugar, well...your yeast have to be able to eat the sugar, convert it to alcohol and co2 (in an already rough environment) and then fall out of solution. It takes a little longer and then there is conditioning time, so yes...bottling will take longer, but there are tricks to making quick bottled beer, as well!

I think the main problem is that people want a fast product AND a strong product. Sorry, but low ABV beers are the only real way to make beer very quickly.

 

[curlyfat]

I think the main problem is that people want a fast product AND a strong product. Sorry, but low ABV beers are the only real way to make beer very quickly.

+1 to this!

I always try to have two taps of a lower abv beer, and two taps the of higher abv. I brew the lower abv ones very often because they are ready fast, and get consumed fast. I brew the higher ones less often, because they take longer to be ready, but take way longer to be consumed (I generally avoid drunkeness.....generally).

To the OP: The best, absolute best investment you can make is in fermentation temperature control. Period.

 

[Malticulous]

My bottled beer is ready faster than the kegged. I'm not talking about carbonation (but my bottles seldom take more than four days to carbonate) but to clear and have the clean flavor I'm looking for before I call it "done." 12 oz clears much sooner than 5 gallons. I've never drank a four day old beer I liked, but 14 is doable.

 

[duffman2]

To the OP: The best, absolute best investment you can make is in fermentation temperature control. Period.

I've been avoiding this investment. I already have two refrigerators and two freezers going in my garage so I don't want to add another one if I can avoid it. Plus I'll only be able to do one bucket at a time if I get a mini-fridge and I generally have 2 to 4 going at any given time.

So, I guess the answer is a fermentation chamber if this will really help out my brews.

 

[Yooper]

I've been avoiding this investment. I already have two refrigerators and two freezers going in my garage so I don't want to add another one if I can avoid it. Plus I'll only be able to do one bucket at a time if I get a mini-fridge and I generally have 2 to 4 going at any given time.

So, I guess the answer is a fermentation chamber if this will really help out my brews.

I think that THE single best technique I've ever done for my beer is temperature control during fermentation. Not going AG, not doing a full boil, not doing water chemistry, but fermentation temperature control.

If you're fermenting ales over 70 degrees, with a few exceptions, you're not making the best beer you can.

The second best technique in my opinion is pitching the correct amount of yeast.

The other things, like ingredients, brewing technique, water, all fall below those two things.

Just a thought- maybe it's taking longer for off-flavors (from too-low pitching rates and too-high fermentation temps) to smooth out? Some beers, like with a ton of roast, take a bit longer to mellow and meld. But overall, you should be drinking good beer a month after brew day. Oh, it can often get a bit better with some conditioning, but "regular" beer should be darn good at 1 month.