4 week Primary: Ridiculous!

[mikeysab]

woo hoo, I have two HBT friends, a gun toting penguin and a guy holding a fish. I just hope the penguin isn't using me for the other guy to get to his fish.

 

[gr8shandini]

Although the OP could have stated his opinion more diplomatically, I'm inclined to step in and defend the idea at least. If you're talking average gravity ales, one doesn't need to be a superhuman brewer with a $15,000 setup to turn around a perfectly good product in two weeks. I generally primary mine for about that long before cold crashing and packaging. Since I keg and force carb, I can start pulling samples pretty shortly after that. It's been my experience that if it tastes good out of the fermenter, there is only a slight improvement until about the three week mark at which point it remains stable for as long as I've had a keg around. Add another week or two for something like a stout or a porter which seems to need the extra time to mellow. YMMV, of course, so I wouldn't say that someone is ridiculous for doing a month long primary.

However, what gets me a little worked up is when a new brewer posts that they're having a problem with an off-flavor and the vocal minority invariably chimes in with "it's still green! Wait longer next time." I remember one thread where the OP was trying to trace a consistent problem across all his beers including one that was in primary for 8 weeks and bottle conditioned for another 6. Still, the most common response he got was "green beer." That's not being helpful at all.

What would be helpful is if people would say "it sounds like you're tasting X which is usually caused by Y and can be avoided by doing A, B, and/or C next time around. As a fix, however, you can let it age a little and your off flavor won't be as pronounced."

In the end, saying that a primary MUST be 4 weeks long is just as arbitrary as the much derided 1-2-3 schedule recommended by most kits.

 

[el_caro]

Unless you want to call bottle carbonation secondary fermentation beer is not put through a secondary fermentation process (with the exception of some bacterial treatments); it lagers, ages, conditions, or whatever else you want to call it but it is not secondary fermentation.

My .02

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

 

[ZamaMan]

Good thing we had you OP. We almost wasted a couple weeks of our beers life. You should probably tell john Palmer and Jamil that so they can learn!

Breweries have to turn around there batches quickly for profit so yeah they move fast through large pitches and filtration to get rid of yeast flavors ect. If the average home brewer doesnt filter to speed up conditioning than an extra week or two in the primary is beneficial for flavor. Bringing up the temp of the fermentor at the end of fermentation can speed that time up yeah but for the average homebrewer the 3-4 week in prkmary advice is very sound.

 

[ZamaMan]

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

Palmer and Jamil both recommend not secondarying the beer

 

[Brulosopher]

If you like your beer less that it could be. Go for it.
I go with the more vocal few
I have noticed that the beer that I don't rush IS NOTICEABLY better!!!!!

Amen.

 

[mikeysab]

Well, if anyone is brewing according to brew kit instructions, then you should be throwing those instructions in the garbage. IMHO, people say to let it sit for 4 weeks because that is their experience, and it works for them. Most people don't know the reason why they do it, but they know it works. In my experience, most of my beers have benefited from a bit of time on the yeast to condition and mature a bit. That's not to say that those beers wouldn't have been just as good if I bottled at 2 weeks instead of four, but it works for me, and I feel comfortable doing it.

Now, if I WANT or NEED to have a beer in 2 weeks, then I'll do it. I'm not going to brew a RIS and expect it to be ready in that time, but I"ll brew a blonde or a cream ale, pale ale, or a wheat beer of 1.060 or less and totally expect it to be done in 2 weeks. I did BM's centennial blonde and went grain to glass in 2 weeks, and that's bottle carbing. It was ready for a family function and it went over great. But if I'm doing an Imperial chocolate cherry oak aged double oatmeal breakfast russian irish red india pale stout, I"m certainly gonna leave myself a bit of time for it to come into its own.

Like the OP said, if you taste a beer at ten days, or seven or 30, and you feel comfortable bottling it, then go for it. Just because I say that it should sit on the yeast for another week doesn't mean $hit, it's just my experience. I'd love to get every beer I brew into a bottle or keg after 10 days, but I tend to brew beers that do need time on the yeast. I don't brew very many hefes, creams or blondes. And even if I did, unless I needed them ready for a function, I'd leave them anyway. I'm a fat, lazy piece of crap that hates bottling, so 4 weeks to me is a no brainer. Hey, I gotta bottle it sooner or later.

 

[alestateyall]

and so begins yet another topic on this dead horse of a subject....

+1

 

[helibrewer]

John Palmer would appear to disagree with your call on this and does in fact call the clean up/ conditioning that continues to go on after primary fermentation has ended as the conditioning or secondary phase of fermentation. This occurs whether you rack to a secondary fermentation vessel or leave it in the primary FV?

The key phrase he uses is phase of fermentation. I would argue that conditioning is the tertiary phase of fermentation which actually partialy overlaps the exponential growth phase of primary fermentation. A true secondary fermentation would be something like malolactic fermentation in red wine where O. oeni is introduced to convert malic acid to lactic acid.
S. cerevisiae (beer and wine yeast) has multiple phases of one primary fermentation.

 

[Brulosopher]

I get what you're saying about not listening to people on when their beers SHOULD be done, but rather relying on the beer itself to let you know when it's done. I also know that you're right about beers being done in 10 days. I've done it, and a lot of others have also. I'm not so sure that people are really pushing the idea that 4 weeks is the only way to make good beer. I don't think it can hurt though, but that's just my opinion. The beer myths thread is a helpful one, but like you said yourself, personal experience weighs more than any thread we can read online.

Your delivery is what threw people off a bit. Obviously, you're trying to help, and your post will probably help some new brewers rely on the beer, and not the posts, to let them know when it's done. Let's face it, there's many ways to make beer,some that are more convenient than others. Like some have said, ask ten brewers how to make beer and you'll get 10 different answers. (okay, that's an abortion of a quote I read somewhere). Bottom line is, it's all about the beer.

Kudos on taking a more neutral approach. While I have my own opinions on this issue, I don't see the point in beating the dude up for trying to help. If you fight fire with fire, well...

It IS all about the beer.

 

[gr8shandini]

Good thing we had you OP. We almost wasted a couple weeks of our beers life. You should probably tell john Palmer and Jamil that so they can learn!

Breweries have to turn around there batches quickly for profit so yeah they move fast through large pitches and filtration to get rid of yeast flavors ect. If the average home brewer doesnt filter to speed up conditioning than an extra week or two in the primary is beneficial for flavor. Bringing up the temp of the fermentor at the end of fermentation can speed that time up yeah but for the average homebrewer the 3-4 week in prkmary advice is very sound.

The trouble here is that the average advice for the average new brewer is now morphing into an edict for all brewers to follow the same advice regardless of process and experience. If you've brewed properly to begin with, at least half of those 3 to 4 weeks are just waiting for the yeast to fall to the bottom of the fermenter. There's no doubt that beer needs to be clear to be tasty, but you don't need a filtration system to get the yeast out of suspension well before they would on their own. A free fridge off of craigslist and 20 cents worth of gelatin will do the same thing in two to three days.

 

[bottlebomber]

I would agree that some beers can be done in 10 days, mostly beers with low to medium alcohol, and plenty of hops which in my mind basically showcase themselves and cover over all but the most exaggerated malt flavors. Most beers do benefit from aging though - time in the fermenter, time in the bottle/keg.

"Let your tastebuds guide you" isn't really sound advice though, because a noob isn't really sure what he's tasting or where its headed, he can only observe if there is an improvement, and overall if it tastes "good".
Beer is very complex though and I've had several beers go through stages of tasting good, then tasting hot, cidery, then finally developing into a mature brew. You have to observe this through experience before you can know what your doing, after which point the experience and suggestions of others are no longer useful. In the meantime, I find it to be very sound advice to new brewers to leave their beer alone for a few weeks. I've seen dozens of threads were beer has been racked after a week, only to stall or taste crappy. I have yet to see a thread where someone was complaining because doing an ample fermentation had harmed their beer.

More commonly they're bitching because they are eager to get drunk

 

[BOBrob]

I agree & disagree with the OP. I regurgitate 4 wks. "primary only", because it gives the noobs time to read & search HBT to gain the knowledge and experience needed to make a decent brew. Reassurance and a some what iffy time line are the benefits of the forums knowledge for the noobs with a $150 kit and no experience. We all preach patience; but to the new brewer the first thing they think of is. "How long is that"???? Cheers

 

[helibrewer]

i agree & disagree with the op. I regurgitate 4 wks. "primary only", because it gives the noobs time to read & search hbt to gain the knowledge and experience needed to make a decent brew. Reassurance and a some what iffy time line are the benefits of the forums knowledge for the noobs with a $150 kit and no experience. We all preach patience; but to the new brewer the first thing they think of is. "how long is that"???? Cheers

+1

 

[weirdboy]

I dunno, I have had even experienced (even professional!) brewers who ought to know better hand me a beer to taste that had acetaldehyde--a sure sign that they are pushing the beer out too fast. 99% of the time if I taste green apples in a beer, it's because they couldn't wait an extra week to let the flavor condition out. I won't name any names but I have been shocked a few times this year by the level of expertise some of these people exhibit in brewing, and still end up with acetaldehyde in beer they are serving when it is one of the easiest beer faults to fix by just WAITING.

I would rather let the beer go a week longer than a week too soon every time.

 

[mikeysab]

More commonly they're bitching because they are eager to get drunk

I've been brewing for three years and that's still my main concern. I've learned to tame the beast though and let my beers mature before getting all crazy and bottling way too soon. Now I"m not saying that I HAVE, and I'm not saying that I HAVE NOT drank straight from the fermenter, but doing so is much better after 4 weeks......I've heard.....from a guy......on the internet.

PS, I didn't mail your stuff yet. My daughter is sick and my MIL just had major surgery, so I've been kooked up in the house all day. I'll try to get it out when I get a second during the day.

 

[Airborneguy]

I agree also most beers i make even Lagers
Are drinkable in 2 weeks.

You may think you make lagers that are drinkable in two weeks...

 

[Calichusetts]

These posts got a little crazy at times, but there is a good point throughout that beginners are getting two (maybe three) different answers to the "how long to primary" question:

1. Wait until gravity readings are the same for three days

2. 4 weeks

These don't match up, which sort of leads to the main idea behind the original post...bottle when its right for you

I wait two weeks minimum, but often bottle when I simply need another carboy so I can brew. Often times, my addiction to brewing outweighs my desire to drink

 

[dienster]

So we shouldn't listen to what someone else says but we should listen to what you say?

Listen to the beer. Become yeast whisperers.

 

[mikeysab]

I become a yeast whisperer the day after drinking my homebrew.

 

[Airborneguy]

You become a yeast curser the day after drinking your homebrew!

 

[mikeysab]

Haha, I had a bomber of that black ipa last night. So far no side effects of homebrew consumption

 

[Yooper]

I think this is a valuable discussion, as long as we can talk like adults about our experiences. But using words like "ridiculous" can sometimes ruffle feathers, so let's keep our discussion civil.

I'm one of those people who have said all along that stating unequivocally that a 4 week primary is standard is not really bad advice- just not necessary.

In a well-made beer with proper pitch rate, proper fermentation temperature, correct ingredients (no "harsh" flavors to mellow out), proper mash techniques, etc, there is no need for much "cleanup" to be done. If off-flavors are avoided in the first place, there is not much need for it to age out. Once primary fermentation slows (usually by day 5 or so), the yeast will then do their work cleaning up diacetyl and acetaldehyde. This takes a day or two, in a healthy yeast population. So by day 7-10, the beer should have done all the fermenting, cleaning up, and so on it would do and start to clear. With a flocculant yeast strain, the beer is often clear by day 7-10.

One of the ways I know when to package is when the beer is clear. I never have gone longer than 3 weeks in primary (as the beer is always clear by then) but I believe that no harm would come in 4-6 weeks in primary either. That's a matter of personal preference for sure.

 

[Hugh_Jass]

The trouble here is that the average advice for the average new brewer is now morphing into an edict for all brewers to follow the same advice regardless of process and experience. If you've brewed properly to begin with, at least half of those 3 to 4 weeks are just waiting for the yeast to fall to the bottom of the fermenter. There's no doubt that beer needs to be clear to be tasty, but you don't need a filtration system to get the yeast out of suspension well before they would on their own. A free fridge off of craigslist and 20 cents worth of gelatin will do the same thing in two to three days.

^^^^^This^^^^^^

Practice proper sanitation, make quality, aerated wort, pitch healthy, and appropriately sized starter for both volume and gravity, and control the fermenting temperature of the beer. You'll be able to move your beer into bottle or keg when it has reached terminal gravity + 2 days.

Will leaving the beer in the fermenter for an extended period hurt? Probably not. IMO, it's not necessary if you follow the above listed steps.

 

[TyTanium]

...In a well-made beer with proper pitch rate, proper fermentation temperature, correct ingredients (no "harsh" flavors to mellow out), proper mash techniques, etc, there is no need for much "cleanup" to be done.

+1 Totally agree. Seeing as that's quite a long list of assumptions to be met, many brewers, especially new brewers, may not have all that stuff down, hence why many may benefit from longer primary. Since it can't (shouldn't) get worse, and can only get better, leave it if you have any doubts.
Personally, I bottle when 1) gravity is steady 2) it tastes awesome 3) when I have time to bottle

This entire thread was ridiculous, btw.

 

[mikeysab]

^^^^^This^^^^^^

Practice proper sanitation, make quality, aerated wort, pitch healthy, and appropriately sized starter for both volume and gravity. You'll be able to move your beer into bottle or keg when it has reached terminal gravity + 2 days.

Will leaving the beer in the fermenter for an extended period hurt? Probably not. IMO, it's not necessary if you follow the above listed steps.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I find it curious how you can agree that new hombrewers advice is becoming an edict to follow, then say extended primary isn't necessary if you follow the steps you listed. By your advice, you can follow all the steps you listed, then ferment your beer out in the sun in the middle of summer and it'll take 7 to 10 days to be yummy golden deliciousness. Okay, you didn't say that, but you get the point.

In my experience, the biggest improvement to my beers have been these:

Figuring out how much yeast to pitch, and actually pitching that amount or slightly more. Lower lag times and unstressed, happy yeast that don't have to fight for sugar have made better beer then when I was pitching a smack pack that sat in my fridge for 6 months.

Fermentation temperature control. Before I built my fermentation chamber, my brew closet was nowhere near a steady temperature. It was too cold in the winter and too hot in the summer, which gave me about 4 months out of the year with acceptable temperatures for decent fermentations. You don't even want to taste Yoopers DFH 60 clone fermented in the mid to upper 80's. (Not a knock on your recipe, Yoop, that's a knock on poor fermentation temperatures, but you get it....I hope)

But all that means nothing if you're brewing some crazy, high gravity beer with a grain bill that looks like an encyclopedia. Some malts or malt combinations need some time to mellow out. If anyone can give me a recipe for a 11 percent RIS that's ready in ten days, I'll brew it tomorrow so I can gladly make this years christmas one for the ages. It depends on the recipe, the ingredients, brewing practices, temperatures.....more than just the calendar.

Like I said in another thread, this is one of those topics that there's no solid answer on. Yes, you can make beer in 10 days, perfectly drinkable and tasty too. There's also beers that take a little longer to become palatable and ready for enjoyment.

 

[gr8shandini]

. . . Seeing as that's quite a long list of assumptions to be met, many brewers, especially new brewers, may not have all that stuff down, hence why many may benefit from longer primary. . . .

I don't disagree with that. However, as I mentioned before, if your only advice for the new guy is to wait longer, you're not helping him out as much as you could. I'd rather point them in the right direction straight away by saying "that'll age out after a few weeks, but if you want to know how to avoid it in the first place, do this next time. . ."

 

[Hugh_Jass]

d

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I find it curious how you can agree that new hombrewers advice is becoming an edict to follow, then say extended primary isn't necessary if you follow the steps you listed. By your advice, you can follow all the steps you listed, then ferment your beer out in the sun in the middle of summer and it'll take 7 to 10 days to be yummy golden deliciousness. Okay, you didn't say that, but you get the point.

In my experience, the biggest improvement to my beers have been these:

Figuring out how much yeast to pitch, and actually pitching that amount or slightly more. Lower lag times and unstressed, happy yeast that don't have to fight for sugar have made better beer then when I was pitching a smack pack that sat in my fridge for 6 months.

Fermentation temperature control. Before I built my fermentation chamber, my brew closet was nowhere near a steady temperature. It was too cold in the winter and too hot in the summer, which gave me about 4 months out of the year with acceptable temperatures for decent fermentations. You don't even want to taste Yoopers DFH 60 clone fermented in the mid to upper 80's. (Not a knock on your recipe, Yoop, that's a knock on poor fermentation temperatures, but you get it....I hope)

But all that means nothing if you're brewing some crazy, high gravity beer with a grain bill that looks like an encyclopedia. Some malts or malt combinations need some time to mellow out. If anyone can give me a recipe for a 11 percent RIS that's ready in ten days, I'll brew it tomorrow so I can gladly make this years christmas one for the ages. It depends on the recipe, the ingredients, brewing practices, temperatures.....more than just the calendar.

Like I said in another thread, this is one of those topics that there's no solid answer on. Yes, you can make beer in 10 days, perfectly drinkable and tasty too. There's also beers that take a little longer to become palatable and ready for enjoyment.

corrected to mention temp control. Thanks.

 

[TyTanium]

I don't disagree with that. However, as I mentioned before, if your only advice for the new guy is to wait longer, you're not helping him out as much as you could. I'd rather point them in the right direction straight away by saying "that'll age out after a few weeks, but if you want to know how to avoid it in the first place, do this next time. . ."

Excellent point.

 

[mikeysab]

d

corrected to mention temp control. Thanks.

Now I need to correct mine for mash temp control. Thats another one of my big improvements. I used to get all flustered and say "ah, 158 is close enough". Until my amber finished 20 poionts too high and undrinkable.

Another bad piece of advice people give to new brewers is "Makin beer is easy, its not rocket science". Its not the most difficult thing in the world to do, but it takes attention to details like temperatures. Temperatures from liquor to fermenting wort, and even as far down as bottle carbing, temperatures are probably the most important thing to make great beer. Sure, you'll make beer with close mash temps, wort chilled till its warm to the touch, and uncontrolled fermentation tempdratures, but good luck drinking it.

For the record, i'm no pro, and certainly no genius. I've made some real stinkers, and i've made some good brews. When I stick to my techniques and don't get lazy, I make good beer. When I get all flustered and sat eff it, this will be good enough, I get less then great results.