Is a secondary fermentation really necessarily on a Belgian Tripel?

Hi all.

Noobie here.

I am currently a few days into my first brew of a Belgian Tripel 5 gallon batch. My question... is a secondary fermentation really necessarily on this type of beer? After reading a lot of posts it looks like people are 50/50 and no real consensus. I guess I don't want to increase the probability of contaminating my current batch by transferring it if I don't have to.

I would appreciate hearing from others more experienced on the topic.

I thank you so much for your time.

All my best,
Matt

 

It isn't required, but some people (myself included) like to secondary if your going to store and age it.

As far as contamination goes, as long as you sanitize you'll be fine. It's hard to contaminate a beer after fermentation is complete.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

Secondary-ing, as far as I know, is for flavor vs fermentation. Once your fermentation is finished you can move it to a secondary if you want to do dry-hopping or racking onto woods/fruits. It's also good for letting some remaining yeast to fall out, to prevent sediment when you bottle.

I used to secondary every beer I made, but recently I was told that secondary-ing with no secondary goal can produce off flavors due to exposure to oxygen. I have a dark ale going into it's third week fermenting, going to try not secondary-ing at all.

 

Either you are bulk conditioning (in secondary) or conditioning in the bottle. I don't think the beer will care either way.

For this type of beer I leave it in the primary for a month than bottle and let it condition 2-3 months before I start tasting. If you do a long secondary you might have to add yeast for bottle carbonation. I have a year old Belgian Strong that is very good.