Airlock with Sound?

[OOC92]

Is there such a thing as an airlock that makes a sound every time it bubbles. Becoming a bit tedious staring at an airlock to see if it is still bubbling.

Suggestions?

 

[Clann]

Use a blowoff tube. They blurrp, expecially if they are on the floor. I normally put a towel or something to quiet it down a bit.

 

[JKoravos]

How often are you checking it that it has become tedious?

 

[OOC92]

That is what I am suspicious of in this other forum:

When to Secondary?

 

[TopherM]

Remember that fermentation is not particularly finished just because the airlock is done bubbling. Don't worry about checking the airlock, just leave all beers under 1.06 OG in the primary for 4-6 weeks. Follow this rule and the beers will always be fully fermented and the yeast will clean up by-products in the solution once the fermentation is complete. If you want to rack to secondary after this step for beer clarity, do so, but you don't really need to.

Patience is the key, not a whistling airlock!

 

[malkore]

That is what I am suspicious of in this other forum:

When to Secondary?

Repeat after me: "The airlock is not a gauge for fermentation activity...it is only a CO2 vent."

Remember, the CO2 will find a way out...and its not always through your airlock.

Gravity readings....


Gravity readings....

(one more time)
Gravity readings....are the ONLY thing you can trust to gauge fermentation activity.

 

[day_trippr]

[...]just leave all beers under 1.06 OG in the primary for 4-6 weeks.[...]

Seriously? That's a really long time to be sitting on the primary yeast cake (and break material, etc). I'd be concerned about autolysis, at the least.

fwiw, I rack off the primary once my gravity objective has been met, and with most ale yeasts, that takes less than a week. Secondary may run a couple/few weeks, and even longer for something huge, but it does it without all that break and dying yeast - the contributions of which almost assuredly aren't a plus...

Cheers

 

[Boleslaus]

Seriously? That's a really long time to be sitting on the primary yeast cake (and break material, etc). I'd be concerned about autolysis, at the least.

fwiw, I rack off the primary once my gravity objective has been met, and with most ale yeasts, that takes less than a week. Secondary may run a couple/few weeks, and even longer for something huge, but it does it without all that break and dying yeast - the contributions of which almost assuredly aren't a plus...

Cheers

I agree that 6 weeks may be a little long, but sooner than 3 weeks with anything other than a lighter ale, and you are pushing it. The old wisdom about autolysis is exactly that...old and outdated. Generally most people agree that 3-4 weeks is helpful and definitely not harmful. The yeast really needs that time to clean up. Going along with this, as it has been said hundreds of times on this forum...secondaries are really unnecessary and can even be worse off than a 3 week primary, except in certain situations.

 

[Revvy]

Seriously? That's a really long time to be sitting on the primary yeast cake (and break material, etc). I'd be concerned about autolysis, at the least.

You're pretty outdated with your info, especially the crap about autolysis.

There's been a shift in belief over the past few years, now most of us leave our beers in primary for a month rather than rack to a secondary, and find our beers are better for being on the yeast that time. And clearer.

You're going by outdated information.

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.

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 was confirmed on a March episode of Brew Strong where John and Jamil talk about how secondary fermentation is an outdated homebrewing technique. John even says that the information in the 1st edition of How to Brew (the web version) is no longer relevant.

John: And unfortunately I'm an perpetuator of the myth at HowtoBrew.com. The 1st edition talks about the benefits of transferring the beer off the yeast.

Jamil: Well that was the popular way of doing things. But that was what, the 1st edition? Stop getting the thing off the internet. Buy yourself the 3rd addition copy and get the updated information.

John: As we've gotten more educated on how much good healthy yeast you need for optimum fermentation the advice that we used to give 20 years ago has changed. 10 years ago, 20 years ago, homebrewers were using with a single packet of dry yeast that was taped to the top of the can. There weren't as many liquid yeast cultures available.

Jamil: People didn't make starters either.

John: Right. So the whole health and vitality of yeast was different back then compared to know. Back then it made sense. You had weaker yeast that had finished fermentation that were more susceptible to autolysis and breaking down. Now that is not the case. The bar of homebrewing has risen to where we are able to make beer that has the same robustness as professional beer. We've gotten our techniques and understanding of what makes a good fermentation up to that level, so you don't need to transfer the beer off the yeast to avoid autolysis like we used to recommend.

Jamil: Unless you are going to do long term at warm temperatures, but even then we are talking over a month. I thought about this as well and I think one of the reasons autolysis....and the fact that people were using weak yeast in inappropriate amounts and the transfer would add some oxygen to it which would help attenuate a few more points. I think that was part of the deal why transferring was considered appropriate years ago.

John: But these days we don't recommend secondary transfer. Leave it in the primary, you know, a month. Today's fermentations are typically healthy enough that you are not going to get autolysis flavors or off-flavors from leaving the beer on the yeast for an extended period of time.

Jamil: And if you are using healthy yeast and the appropriate amount and the thing is... homebrew style fermentors..if you are using a carboy or plastic bucket which have that broad base when the yeast flocculate out they lay in a nice thin layer. When you're dealing with large, tall...one of the things you know people go "Well the commercial brewers they remove the yeast because it is gonna break down, die, and make the beer bad. We should be doing the same thing." That's where alot of this comes from. But the commerical brewers are working with 100 bbl fermenters that are very tall and put a lot of pressure on the yeast. The yeast are jammed into this little cone in the bottom and they are stacked very deep and there is a lot of heat buildup. The core of that yeast mass can be several degrees C higher than the rest of that yeast mass and it can actually cook the yeast and cause them to die faster and cause those problems with flavor and within a couple of days the viability of that yeast which the commercial brewers are going to reuse is going to drop 25%, 50% over a couple of days so they need to get that yeast out of there. You don't have that restriction as a homebrewer. You've got these broad fermenter bases that allow the yeast to be distributed evently. It's an advantage for cleaning up the beer. You have the advantage that the yeast don't break down as fast. You don't have as high a head pressure. There are a lot of advantages.

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/

he 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.
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. But after the Byo/Basic brewing experiment, they started reflecting it in their recipes.

 

[Golddiggie]

I'd be concerned about autolysis, at the least.

Why?? IF you're pitching close to the right amount of yeast, and not pitching several times too much, it's not even remotely an issue in what WE ferment in. The size, shape, and such of OUR fermenters makes this a non-issue.

BTW, I've had batches on the yeast cake for up to 7 weeks (so far) without ANY off flavors being produced. Most of these batches have been fermented inside of kegs (one 5 gallon corny, and assorted shape/sized sanke kegs). Even months later, these brews are still ass-kicking great...

IMO, secondaries are carry-overs from the home brewing days of yor, when ingredients were not nearly as good, including yeast. With what we have available to us today, autolysis is something you shouldn't even think about. Maybe when you start brewing, and fermenting, hundreds of gallons at a time.

For reference, there's a brew pub not far from where I live that has ALL their batches in primary for 10-14 days (or more for bigger brews) before they're kegged and served. They don't secondary ANYTHING... The head brewer is always coming up with new stuff too, which sells out really fast. I'll actually be at another brew pub next Thursday. I should be able to bend the ear of the head brewer there to see what they use for processes. They brew on a slightly larger scale, but I seriously doubt they secondary anything.

BTW, the autolysis boogieman is also disproved in the new yeast book by Chris White and Jamil Zainasheff... Seriously, if you're looking to get your yeast to do more for you, get a copy... I've already added items to my routine from it that has improved my batches. It also covers things like what Revvy says and validates them again.

 

[Boleslaus]

You're pretty outdated with your info, especially the crap about autolysis.

I knew you'd be here shortly Revvy. Thanks as always for the actual cited information instead of me just having to say "most of us".

 

[AnOldUR]

Posts: 1

Hook, line and sinker.

 

[day_trippr]

Nah, I wasn't trolling (but that was a rather ignominious first post. Oh well). I'm old - like, really old - and after giving the responses I engendered a thorough read, feel even older I've always used the same techniques and practices my dad used which always just worked, and other than keeping up with evolving equipment, ingredients and chemistry, never really went looking around for the "new and improved" ways. As a result I clearly got hoisted on my own dated petard.

So...now that I've gotten all this attention may I extend the question to include break material, and whether "modern perceptions" also dismiss that as a potential off-flavor impact during such long primary fermentations?

btw, any time I transfer a fermenting or fermented product, I do a CO2 purge of the target vessel first, so aeration is pretty much a non-issue. I'm also totally OC verging on fanatical about sanitation, and have never lost a batch to bugs...

Cheers - and thanks for the education. It probably won't be the last

 

[passedpawn]

You're pretty outdated with your info, especially the crap about autolysis.

Revvy, maybe you know more than the poster, but calling anyone's honest contribution to a thread "crap" is low.

 

[Revvy]

So...now that I've gotten all this attention may I extend the question to include break material, and whether "modern perceptions" also dismiss that as a potential off-flavor impact during such long primary fermentations?

Yeah, again things have changed, we're not so afraid of so called "off flavors" by things that are part of the natural process of the beer production, touching the beer-yeast, trub, spent hops, break matter. Yeast are fastidious creatures, if left to their own devices they will go back and clean up any byproducts that cause off flavors. In fact you find a lot of things that used to freak people out just have proven to be less true. And some processes that were de-riguer back in the day, such as skimming off krausen aren't all that common any more.

 

[Revvy]

Revvy, maybe you know more than the poster, but calling anyone's honest contribution to a thread "crap" is low.

I'm sure he's not that thin skinned, most people aren't.

Besides if one looks at autolysis as "peritonitis" of the yeast world, the cells breaking open and waste products bursting out, like the chest ripper in Alien- then my descriptor is not too far off from the truth.

 

[Boleslaus]

But back to the original question....if you want your airlock to make sound so you don't have to check it so often....you're checking it too often haha. As you've seen in this thread, just leave it in the primary longer.

 

[nefarious_1_]

Is there such a thing as an airlock that makes a sound every time it bubbles. Becoming a bit tedious staring at an airlock to see if it is still bubbling.

Suggestions?

Don't stare at your airlock, it's bad for your eyes.

Instead, use a hydrometer.

 

[BrewMoreBeers]

what is that old sayin'... "a watched airlock never bubbles"

 

[TopherM]

If you do want an airlock that makes sound, I'm sure you could just rig a sanatized kazzoo or a whistle to the top.

The first few days of fermentation would be F'N ANNOYING though!

 

[Revvy]

If you do want an airlock that makes sound, I'm sure you could just rig a sanatized kazzoo or a whistle to the top.

Or brew exclusively with Burton Ale yeast and an s type airlock....Damn thing whistled for like 3 days, THEN had a blowoff.

 

[passedpawn]

I put a balloon on top of an airlock once. It filled a little, but did not inflate completely as I had hoped it would. I think air was leaking somewhere around the balloon. The balloon did stand up, though, which was an indicator in itself.

I'll probably try that experiment again, but with better seal. I wonder if the back pressure changes the nature of the fermentation.

 

[GreggZ]

I think you would have to take the top of a three piece airlock off, but you could hot glue a small jingle bell to the top of the floating component. I think that would make enough noise to hear. Also it might drive you crazy. Forgive me if someone already posted something like this because I did not read the entire thread.

 

[Revvy]

I think you would have to take the top of a three piece airlock off, but you could hot glue a small jingle bell to the top of the floating component. I think that would make enough noise to hear. Also it might drive you crazy. Forgive me if someone already posted something like this because I did not read the entire thread.

I think a siren whistle would be cool.

 

[OOC92]

Ye gods this has been a terrific yarn, amazing where it has gone. But to be honest I realize the ridiculousness of my tech suggestion, not to worry

 

[malkore]

I'm gonna hook a duck call up to mine.


....quack...





...quack....

 

[OOC92]

Or a whoopie cushion?

 

[the_Sliver]

John: As we've gotten more educated on how much good healthy yeast you need for optimum fermentation the advice that we used to give 20 years ago has changed. 10 years ago, 20 years ago, homebrewers were using with a single packet of dry yeast that was taped to the top of the can. There weren't as many liquid yeast cultures available.

Sorry to revive an old(ish) thread, but does this particular quote mean that for extract kits that come with a packet of yeast, we should be concerned about autolysis and should seconday?

I ask because I bought an extract kit from my LHBS (newbie here) and it came with a packet of Cooper's yeast!

 

[Revvy]

Sorry to revive an old(ish) thread, but does this particular quote mean that for extract kits that come with a packet of yeast, we should be concerned about autolysis and should seconday?

I ask because I bought an extract kit from my LHBS (newbie here) and it came with a packet of Cooper's yeast!

If it was 30 years ago...maybe...Today? No.

 

[the_Sliver]

Awesome .

 

[wired247]

10 days I'm drinking mine. I don't know how you guys leave them in the tanks that long.

 

[Golddiggie]

10 days I'm drinking mine. I don't know how you guys leave them in the tanks that long.

We have enough home brew already ready for drinking to satisfy us until the batches in primary are ready. Patience is one of the best things you can learn/develop when it comes to brewing.

 

[PseudoChef]

I agree that 6 weeks may be a little long, but sooner than 3 weeks with anything other than a lighter ale, and you are pushing it. The old wisdom about autolysis is exactly that...old and outdated. Generally most people agree that 3-4 weeks is helpful and definitely not harmful. The yeast really needs that time to clean up. Going along with this, as it has been said hundreds of times on this forum...secondaries are really unnecessary and can even be worse off than a 3 week primary, except in certain situations.

Not true at all. It seems this whole "yeast cleaning up after themselves" thing has really blown out of proportion. Yeast shouldn't need 3 weeks to metabolise anything post fermentation. Once fermentation is complete (which should be within a week since you're pitching enough healthy yeast, right? Right.) yeast only need about 2-3 days to metabolise these byproducts of fermentation.

Diacetyl takes roughly 2 days to be rid of (and let's face it, if you are pitching at the proper, cool, temperature that you should be, diacetyl shouldn't be a concern). Acetaldehyde is the same thing - it's a precursor to ethanol, so if you're having too much green apple flavor, you aren't getting a complete and healthy fermentation. Same thing goes with fusel alcohols. If you have a good fermentation, then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

[Celticway]

Not true at all. It seems this whole "yeast cleaning up after themselves" thing has really blown out of proportion. Yeast shouldn't need 3 weeks to metabolise anything post fermentation. Once fermentation is complete (which should be within a week since you're pitching enough healthy yeast, right? Right.) yeast only need about 2-3 days to metabolise these byproducts of fermentation.

Diacetyl takes roughly 2 days to be rid of (and let's face it, if you are pitching at the proper, cool, temperature that you should be, diacetyl shouldn't be a concern). Acetaldehyde is the same thing - it's a precursor to ethanol, so if you're having too much green apple flavor, you aren't getting a complete and healthy fermentation. Same thing goes with fusel alcohols. If you have a good fermentation, then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

Yeah, what he said.

 

[Yooper]

Not true at all. It seems this whole "yeast cleaning up after themselves" thing has really blown out of proportion. Yeast shouldn't need 3 weeks to metabolise anything post fermentation. Once fermentation is complete (which should be within a week since you're pitching enough healthy yeast, right? Right.) yeast only need about 2-3 days to metabolise these byproducts of fermentation.

Diacetyl takes roughly 2 days to be rid of (and let's face it, if you are pitching at the proper, cool, temperature that you should be, diacetyl shouldn't be a concern). Acetaldehyde is the same thing - it's a precursor to ethanol, so if you're having too much green apple flavor, you aren't getting a complete and healthy fermentation. Same thing goes with fusel alcohols. If you have a good fermentation, then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

I agree with this wholely! I feel like I'm the only one saying it around here, but it seems like we've gone from "Get the beer off of the yeast by day three!!!" to "Leave the beer for at least a month on the yeast!"

Neither is necessarily the best practice, although I don't see much harm in leaving the beer in an extended primary.

But a well made ale is easily packaged by day 14-20, and with good results. The yeast "cleaning up after itself" is easily done by day 3 after FG is reached. I do like to wait for some clarity, as I like having less sediment in the bottle. But I routinely package beers at week 2.

 

[wired247]

Being patient just ties up your fermenters for an extended period for no particular reason. Ales up to 1.060 or more should be done fermenting with most yeast strains in 5-7 days at 68 degrees and with a good flocculant yeast should be ready for transfer to the bright tank within a few days after. I can remember precious few ales I ran commercially that spent more than 12 days from grain to bottle. If it took that long there was a serious problem with the yeast strain.

 

[JKoravos]

Not true at all. It seems this whole "yeast cleaning up after themselves" thing has really blown out of proportion. Yeast shouldn't need 3 weeks to metabolise anything post fermentation. Once fermentation is complete (which should be within a week since you're pitching enough healthy yeast, right? Right.) yeast only need about 2-3 days to metabolise these byproducts of fermentation.

Diacetyl takes roughly 2 days to be rid of (and let's face it, if you are pitching at the proper, cool, temperature that you should be, diacetyl shouldn't be a concern). Acetaldehyde is the same thing - it's a precursor to ethanol, so if you're having too much green apple flavor, you aren't getting a complete and healthy fermentation. Same thing goes with fusel alcohols. If you have a good fermentation, then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

Not to mention the fact that even if you did transfer your beer after 5-7 days, there will be plenty of yeast still suspended in the beer to take care of any extended 'cleaning up' that needs to be done.

I don't want to get in a flame war about autolysis, but a member on another forum I frequent works in the lab at a VERY large craft brewer. They do tastings on the beers after sitting on yeast at different intervals. According to him people can taste autolysis flavors after 1 week and it is very prominent after 4 weeks. Now, these are trained people, so they probably taste things most of us don't and they are tasting beers that they taste every day so they can pick up minute differences. But I certainly believe him if he says it.

There's a big difference between 'no secondary' and leaving your beer in primary for 4-6 weeks. I'm sure it's OK to leave it there 4-6 weeks, assuming your process is fine, but I'd bet a qualified beer judge could pick up more off flavors in the beer that's been in primary 6 vs. 2 weeks.

For people leaving their beer in primary 3+ weeks, I'd suggest pulling some off and bottling it after the gravity stabilizes+3days, then compare it to the stuff in there for the extended primary. If it's taking longer than 2 weeks for you to reach FG for virtually any beer under 1.100, you need to look at your process.

 

[PseudoChef]

I don't want to get in a flame war about autolysis, but a member on another forum I frequent works in the lab at a VERY large craft brewer. They do tastings on the beers after sitting on yeast at different intervals. According to him people can taste autolysis flavors after 1 week and it is very prominent after 4 weeks. Now, these are trained people, so they probably taste things most of us don't and they are tasting beers that they taste every day so they can pick up minute differences. But I certainly believe him if he says it.

I'm not saying anything about autolysis or that leaving your beer in the primary is bad. It's not. I've done it myself when I have a backlog (and like Yooper, I don't secondary either - just right to keg). I'm simply saying that it's not as necessary as people are now led to believe.

Autolysis doesn't happen that quickly on a homebrew scale, though. Production breweries make multiple barrels of beer at a time, and generally ferment in cylindroconical fermentors. The geometry of the fermentor coupled with the added pressure on the yeast builds heat much easier than the flat coating and surface exposed yeast that occurs in a carboy or bucket. Even conicals on a homebrew scale don't generate enough pressure to build up heat that significant.

tl;dr: Autolysis is a concern in commercial production, but not often in homebrew.

 

[wired247]

There is no heat retained in a commercial cylindroconical vessel. Temperature is maintained with a chilled glycol jacket at whatever set point the brewer or cellarmaster want. For an ale its typically 66-68 degrees and a cold crash at 5-7 days with 2-4 days before filtering to bright.

 

[utopeya]

I think the point is that, even if the temperature of the vessel is maintained, there's a big cone of yeast sitting at the bottom of the vessel. The yeast in the middle of the cone are going to be generating their own heat and so are going to be significantly warmer than anything else in the vessel.