Best time to transfer to secondary

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

gtheroux

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Location
calgary
I just racked into primary, fermentation is going way better then planned(first batch of beer, lots of wine).

Is is better to get it off the yeast cake/trub as soon as you can. When its stayed stable for so many readings?

Or when its 99% done so it gives off a little CO2 to rid the transfer of any oxidizing air?

Side notes- Im doing a AIPA, OG 1.8, Partial E, missed Irish Moss(drinking is not a good idea while brewing)


:ban:... peanut butter jelly time
 
Best time is when you need an empty Primary. If not, no need to secondary. I do 3-4 weeks in Primary than keg.
 
The yeast cake/trub dont give off any off flavors over time?

No, not in that amount of time. If you were going to bulk age it for 6 months or more you might want to get it off of the cake but the yeast have some cleaning up to do after fermentation is complete. By-products are produced during fermentation that the yeast will clean up afterwards.
 
The yeast cake/trub dont give off any off flavors over time?

They may... it's caused by autolysis, when yeast east dead yeast cells. In good conditions, you should be able to let your beer remain in your primary for a month + without an issue. I rarely use a secondary now. Only time I do is:
- when I need another primary
- when I'm using fruit
- when I'm dry hopping and want to reuse my yeast cake
 
Leave it in the primary. I've got pics of a Pale Ale that I left for 4 weeks and it is a beautifully clear beer that smells fantastic. If I get around to it I'll post the pics tonight.

I just racked into primary, fermentation is going way better then planned(first batch of beer, lots of wine).

Is is better to get it off the yeast cake/trub as soon as you can. When its stayed stable for so many readings?

Or when its 99% done so it gives off a little CO2 to rid the transfer of any oxidizing air?

Side notes- Im doing a AIPA, OG 1.8, Partial E, missed Irish Moss(drinking is not a good idea while brewing)


:ban:... peanut butter jelly time
 
They may... it's caused by autolysis, when yeast east dead yeast cells. In good conditions, you should be able to let your beer remain in your primary for a month + without an issue. I rarely use a secondary now. Only time I do is:
- when I need another primary
- when I'm using fruit
- when I'm dry hopping and want to reuse my yeast cake

When you say good condition. What doesn that mean, temp, quike fermentation?? I just have no clue about this
 
When you say good condition. What doesn that mean, temp, quike fermentation?? I just have no clue about this

my bad...

If you've managed to properly sanitize your vessels and transfer tools, maintain stable fermentation temperatures at the correct temps and kept it out of direct sunlight, then you should be good to go.
 
Let me also add,

- the fermentation process has progressed as expected and you don't have crazy things growing on your beer...

:)
 
They may... it's caused by autolysis, when yeast east dead yeast cells. In good conditions, you should be able to let your beer remain in your primary for a month + without an issue. I rarely use a secondary now. Only time I do is:
- when I need another primary
- when I'm using fruit
- when I'm dry hopping and want to reuse my yeast cake

Sounds like you have been reading the old Papazian text. The new school of thought is that autolysis is not an issue on the homebrew scale. Just primary for 3-4 weeks and then bottle or keg. Even longer in the primary is fine.
 
Sounds like you have been reading the old Papazian text. The new school of thought is that autolysis is not an issue on the homebrew scale. Just primary for 3-4 weeks and then bottle or keg. Even longer in the primary is fine.

hmmm, I thought I said exactly what you just typed... maybe re-read my answer??
 
Let me also add,

- the fermentation process has progressed as expected and you don't have crazy things growing on your beer...

:)

Thanx man, I think there was change in fermenting temp... Had a blow off and I cooled it when I moved it to the basement... 74f pitch temp( receit called for this)... Then cooled it to 71 next day... And over swung to 66f and then back to 68 constant to date... Lol...
 
Thanx man, I think there was change in fermenting temp... Had a blow off and I cooled it when I moved it to the basement... 74f pitch temp( receit called for this)... Then cooled it to 71 next day... And over swung to 66f and then back to 68 constant to date... Lol...

Should be fine... as long as you were clean and sanitary... Beer is VERY forgiving.
 
Best time to transfer to secondary?

Never.... rack to bottling bucket or keg for ales not requiring oaking or fruit additions IMO (and even then its probably debatable).
 
Here's the pics of my Pale Ale after sitting four weeks in primary.

IMG_0269.jpg

IMG_0265.jpg

IMG_0262.jpg
 
The yeast cake/trub dont give off any off flavors over time?

Yeah that belief is about 30 years out of date.



Fermenting the beer is just a part of what the yeast do. If you leave the beer alone, they will go back and clean up the byproducts of fermentation that often lead to off flavors. That's why many brewers skip secondary and leave our beers alone in primary for a month. It leaves plenty of time for the yeast to ferment, clean up after themselves and then fall out, leaving our beers crystal clear, with a tight yeast cake.

This is the latest recommendation, it is the same one many of us have been giving for several years on here.

John Palmer said:
Tom from Michigan asks:
I have a few questions about secondary fermentations. I've read both pros and cons for 2nd fermentations and it is driving me crazy what to do. One, are they necessary for lower Gravity beers?
Two, what is the dividing line between low gravity and high gravity beers? Is it 1.060 and higher?
Three, I have an American Brown Ale in the primary right now, a SG of 1.058, Should I secondary ferment this or not?
Your advice is appreciated, thanks for all you do!

Allen from New York asks:

John, please talk about why or why not you would NOT use a secondary fermenter (bright tank?) and why or why not a primary only fermentation is a good idea. In other words, give some clarification or reason why primary only is fine, versus the old theory of primary then secondary normal gravity ale fermentations.

Palmer answers:

These are good questions – When and why would you need to use a secondary fermenter? First some background – I used to recommend racking a beer to a secondary fermenter. My recommendation was based on the premise that (20 years ago) larger (higher gravity) beers took longer to ferment completely, and that getting the beer off the yeast reduced the risk of yeast autolysis (ie., meaty or rubbery off-flavors) and it allowed more time for flocculation and clarification, reducing the amount of yeast and trub carryover to the bottle. Twenty years ago, a homebrewed beer typically had better flavor, or perhaps less risk of off-flavors, if it was racked off the trub and clarified before bottling. Today that is not the case.

The risk inherent to any beer transfer, whether it is fermenter-to-fermenter or fermenter-to-bottles, is oxidation and staling. Any oxygen exposure after fermentation will lead to staling, and the more exposure, and the warmer the storage temperature, the faster the beer will go stale.

Racking to a secondary fermenter used to be recommended because staling was simply a fact of life – like death and taxes. But the risk of autolysis was real and worth avoiding – like cholera. In other words, you know you are going to die eventually, but death by cholera is worth avoiding.

But then modern medicine appeared, or in our case, better yeast and better yeast-handling information. Suddenly, death by autolysis is rare for a beer because of two factors: the freshness and health of the yeast being pitched has drastically improved, and proper pitching rates are better understood. The yeast no longer drop dead and burst like Mr. Creosote from Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life when fermentation is complete – they are able to hibernate and wait for the next fermentation to come around. The beer has time to clarify in the primary fermenter without generating off-flavors. With autolysis no longer a concern, staling becomes the main problem. The shelf life of a beer can be greatly enhanced by avoiding oxygen exposure and storing the beer cold (after it has had time to carbonate).

Therefore I, and Jamil and White Labs and Wyeast Labs, do not recommend racking to a secondary fermenter for ANY ale, except when conducting an actual second fermentation, such as adding fruit or souring. Racking to prevent autolysis is not necessary, and therefore the risk of oxidation is completely avoidable. Even lagers do not require racking to a second fermenter before lagering. With the right pitching rate, using fresh healthy yeast, and proper aeration of the wort prior to pitching, the fermentation of the beer will be complete within 3-8 days (bigger = longer). This time period includes the secondary or conditioning phase of fermentation when the yeast clean up acetaldehyde and diacetyl. The real purpose of lagering a beer is to use the colder temperatures to encourage the yeast to flocculate and promote the precipitation and sedimentation of microparticles and haze.

So, the new rule of thumb: don’t rack a beer to a secondary, ever, unless you are going to conduct a secondary fermentation.

THIS is where the latest discussion and all your questions answered.
We have multiple threads about this all over the place, like this one,so we really don't need to go over it again, all the info you need is here;

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/

We basically proved that old theory wrong on here 5 years ago, and now the rest fo the brewing community is catching up. Though a lot of old dogs don't tend to follow the latest news, and perpetuate the old stuff.

The autolysis from prolong yeast contact has fallen by the wayside, in fact yeast contact is now seen as a good thing.

All my beers sit a minimum of 1 month in the primary. And I recently bottled a beer that sat in primary for 5.5 months with no ill effects.....

You'll find that more and more recipes these days do not advocate moving to a secondary at all, but mention primary for a month, which is starting to reflect the shift in brewing culture that has occurred in the last 4 years, MOSTLY because of many of us on here, skipping secondary, opting for longer primaries, and writing about it. Recipes in BYO have begun stating that in their magazine. I remember the "scandal" it caused i the letters to the editor's section a month later, it was just like how it was here when we began discussing it, except a lot more civil than it was here. But after the Byo/Basic brewing experiment, they started reflecting it in their recipes.
 
Yeah that belief is about 30 years out of date.

Trimmed post for space...

Thank you for this post Revvy. I've been lurking around here for a couple of weeks now while I brew my first 5-gallon batch ever. Right now, its in the secondary.

Generally my feeling as a complete newcomer to this forum and hobby has been that those not using a secondary seem to be following a trend that is possibly affected by Internet egos and clique-ism, based on how quickly some posters seem to constantly reiterate that they do not secondary when someone asks a question about it.

This particular post was enough to dispel that feeling for me. Good, concise information that is very helpful to me as a newbie. I plan to only use the secondary when really necessary from now on.

Thanks for the great forum everyone.
 
Generally my feeling as a complete newcomer to this forum and hobby has been that those not using a secondary seem to be following a trend that is possibly affected by Internet egos and clique-ism, based on how quickly some posters seem to constantly reiterate that they do not secondary when someone asks a question about it.


Thanks for the great forum everyone.

No it's just been a long fought battle to have the that idea that autolysis isn't instant or even common and that the yeast actually are our friends, and we should let them work. Those of us who began to question these "norms" like the OP quoted that you had to get the yeast off or else you were gaurenteed off flavors will villified and trolled incesseantly for these beliefs. It took folks trying it for themselves to realize the actual benefits of it, often some of the most agressively anti this became the greatest supporters of it.

This is an example https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f14/apologies-revvy-212108/

Even some of the arguments and doubts, some still vicious can be found in the Jamil thread I linked above.

The folks who come out so quickly and post that they don't use secondaries are not merely a clique, they are just trying to point out that it's not necessary and that autolysis/off flavors isn't a given these days, they are coming from experience, and merely sharing it.

The whole autolysis idea was based on a lot of rote fear. That;s the clique...the people who still repeat that old chestnut, basically quoting verbatum the passage from the online edition of how to brew that Palmer has recanted.....the folks coming on are just trying to nip it in the bud and sharing their experiences...Like I've said for 5 years many of us have found are beers clearer, cleaner and better tasting that when we used to secondary...That's primarily because most people if they do secondary do it too soon..usually following that other silly idea of the 1-2-3 rule- not realizing that the yeast can't read recipes, don't know when they are supposed to be done, and have their own timeframe- In fact with lagtime they may only actually be fermenting for 3 or 4 days before someone arbitrarily moves the beer...that leads to stuck fermentations, krausens in secondaries and those dreaded off flavors (because the yeast hasn't had a chance to clean up after their own byproducts of fermentation, if you move them before they get to that point in their life cycle- which is the true secondary phase, the cleanup phase.)

If you want to get a handle of the history of this shift, search back 3-4 years ago and look at some of the arguments...they weren't discussions, or debates, some of them were downright mean spirited, and you'll get an idea where we're all coming from.

:mug:
 
If you want to get a handle of the history of this shift, search back 3-4 years ago and look at some of the arguments...they weren't discussions, or debates, some of them were downright mean spirited, and you'll get an idea where we're all coming from.

:mug:

Very interesting. Without having known the history behind the change in approach, it seemed a bit odd. I hope I was clear in saying I no longer think that and that your post helped clear my thinking on the matter.

One thing I've noticed here is that this place is a LOT different than Poker forums! In a good way.
 
When you do a primary only fermentation do you need to start with a 6 gal carboy? The 5 gal ones I have seem too small and would blow off the airlock. I assume you are not using a plastic bucket for fermentation.
 
I either us a bucket or my 6 gallon carboy. Depends on what I have available.

When you do a primary only fermentation do you need to start with a 6 gal carboy? The 5 gal ones I have seem too small and would blow off the airlock. I assume you are not using a plastic bucket for fermentation.
 
When you do a primary only fermentation do you need to start with a 6 gal carboy? The 5 gal ones I have seem too small and would blow off the airlock. I assume you are not using a plastic bucket for fermentation.


FYI,
Every question you could ever contemplate about long primaries has been answered up in the Jamil thread I posted originally. That's the best place to go for info.
 
Wow. This is a very interesting thread. I've been brewing for 10 - 12 years and I've never heard of this. I've always put mine in the secondary after about a week.

I will definately have to try this the next time I brew.

I do have question though; does it make a difference if I use a plastic bucket or glass Carboy? I've always been told that plastic allow oxygen to get through and that's why you transfer it to the carboy.
 
Wow. This is a very interesting thread. I've been brewing for 10 - 12 years and I've never heard of this. I've always put mine in the secondary after about a week.

I will definately have to try this the next time I brew.

I do have question though; does it make a difference if I use a plastic bucket or glass Carboy? I've always been told that plastic allow oxygen to get through and that's why you transfer it to the carboy.

I'll save Revvy from getting closer to 30,000 posts.

No it does not matter. As long as you arent leaving your beer in primary for 6+ months, the bucket will not allow oxygen in. Even then, some people contest that youd be fine after 6+ months.
 
I recently bottled a Vanilla Porter that sat in the primary bucket for a month. Tasted one yesterday, and it's the best beer I have brewed so far. Transferring to a secondary seems like an unnecessary effort that may cause unnecessary oxidation or other problems. Unless you have a good reason to move the beer to a secondary, I wouldn't.

NRS
 
Back
Top