Same carboy for primary and 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.

Ernst-Haeckel

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
117
Reaction score
0
Location
MA
I am going to start doing a bunch of 2.5 gallon experimental AG brews, but rather than having a lot of 3 gallon carboys lying around I was thinking "wait, why don't I just use the same carboy for the primary and secondary?" Basically, I would rack from the primary to a bottling bucket, clean out the primary, then transfer back to the carboy for secondary fermentation.

I can't think of any reason this would be inadvisable. In fact, it seems like something people probably do all the time, I just never thought of it because I am a classically trained Papazian follower! Any thoughts?
 
All that extra movement opens the beer up to a great risk for oxygenation. Rather than even bothering why don't you consider doing what many many many of us have been doing for years and just leave your beer in primary for a month?

Even John Palmer advocates that now;

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.
 
I have done this multiple times, before I had 2 carboys. The only possible downside may be increased potential for introducing oxygen from more transfers. But as long as care is taken during transfers it should be fine. Keep experimenting!!
 
Thanks for the reply's. I think I will try just leaving it in the primary. Revvy, thanks for posting the Palmer bit!

I know I've heard lots of people speak praises for ditching secondary; however I am surprised to read that even lagers don't need a secondary, for clarity's sake!
 
Heh -- I've been a fan of no secondaries, but I always thought transfering before lagering to be necessary. Hmm.
 
I would say that going to another carboy would be an advantage when you're adding flavor elements to the brewing post primary fermentation. Such as racking over oak chips/cubes, or other things like vanilla beans. I have a porter in primary right now that will be getting racked over a couple of vanilla beans next week. It's been in primary since 12/11, so it will be over two weeks before going to secondary. I was going to let it go to 1/1/11, but I'm thinking of washing the yeast cake and using part of it in the next brew, on 1/1/11... I'm actually finalizing the yeast selection now, so I might go with something else. If I do, then I'll be racking on 1/1/11 so that I can both add the flavor element, plus free up my primary carboy for the new brew...
 
So is a secondary necessary for a lauger?

In my opinion, yes. But just as many people will tell you they've had good results with lagering right on the yeast cake.

Light lagers, especially, have very little to help hide any yeast character or flaws, and my feeling is that leaving a beer on the yeast cake for 12 weeks is not a good idea, lager or ale. You might be able to get away with it on an ale, but not with the "clean" yeast-less flavor of a lager.

Not because of autolysis, as I don't think that happens very fast, but I make wine as well. I can tell you that there is definitely some character imparted from leaving it on the sediment for more than a month or so. Not necessarily unpleasant, but definitely there.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top