CYBI Clone Times Vs. Long Primary

[RJS]

So, we have heard of Tasty's 8 day beers and all the other crew pumping out beers in approx. 8 to 10 days and cloning commercial beers with high standards.

How does this compare to the long primary and aging theory?

How can we justify what we say here everyday when they are doing this?

Is filtering the secret?

 

[AnchorBock]

Proper pitching rates, 02, and filtering can turn beers around quite quickly. Tasty always talks about filtering - I think he filters basically all of his beers.

Even without filtering, you can turn beers around pretty quickly especially when using a high floc'ing yeast like 002/1968. Most of my bitters are being drank by day 14 (best when young). With yeasts like 001/1056 I'll typically add gelatin when kegging and leave it for about a week in the kegerator before I start drinking it, so those are grain to glass in closer to 21 days.

 

[D0ug]

The longer (3-4 week) primary time is not a steadfast rule adhered to by everyone on this site, in fact I think some of the moderators have weighed in saying they have had plenty of beers that finish in 10-14 days.

That said, a lot depends on the beer, higher abv, fruit additions, etc... can all increase the amount of conditioning time a beer requires, as can poor techniques like high fermentation temps or low pitch rates.

That said, I think 3-4 weeks in the primary generally gives me a very clear and well conditioned beer with no risk of having a "green" beer. The extra time doesn't make that much difference to me and I would rather let it sit than pull it early, I'm not in that much of a hurry.

jmo

 

[Malticulous]

I don't listen to BN or use long primaries. The so called conditioning phase is just a few days not weeks. Beyond that the yeast is dormant and your just clearing out small partials by gravity. Sure there is flavor maturation but most well brewed ales don't really need much.

 

[RJS]

Excellent replies

 

[Yooper]

I don't listen to BN or use long primaries. The so called conditioning phase is just a few days not weeks. Beyond that the yeast is dormant and your just clearing out small partials by gravity. Sure there is flavor maturation but most well brewed ales don't really need much.

That's where I am. I still fail to see the need for this long primary that so many adhere to without a good solid scientific reason. Will it hurt? No, probably not. Is it necessary? Certainly not.

A well made beer can be packaged a day or two after hitting FG. If the proper amount of yeast is pitched into the wort, and fermented at the proper temperature, a beer should be at FG in 3 days or so, 5 at the outside. I give it a couple of days to "clean up" and start to clear. The "clean up" means that the yeast go back and digest their own waste products before flocculating out. A flocculant yeast will clear the beer quickly, while I've had to wait a bit longer for S05 and Denny's Favorite. But even so, most beers are packaged at my house by day 10.

I have a couple of recipes that are better with some age (my oatmeal stout and my Belgian triple) but they age just fine in the bottle or keg.

If a beer is made well, there isn't any reason to leave it sit more than a couple of days after it's done. It probably won't hurt, though I'm unsure of the yeast character after a month-long primary.

I've heard on here that several people have posted that their best beers spent a month in the primary. That could be true. But I wonder if some of the improvement could simply be better brewing techniques and not just a super-long primary. I've heard this anecdotal evidence, but never seen any scientific evidence or even a one-to-one comparison.

If someone REALLY wants to know if a month long primary actually results in better tasting beer, I'd suggest two batches side by side. One bottled on day 12, one bottled on day 30. Then a blind taste test. Maybe then I'd be convinced, but at this point I don't believe it.

 

[scurry64]

That's where I am. I still fail to see the need for this long primary that so many adhere to without a good solid scientific reason. Will it hurt? No, probably not. Is it necessary? Certainly not.

A well made beer can be packaged a day or two after hitting FG. If the proper amount of yeast is pitched into the wort, and fermented at the proper temperature, a beer should be at FG in 3 days or so, 5 at the outside. I give it a couple of days to "clean up" and start to clear. The "clean up" means that the yeast go back and digest their own waste products before flocculating out. A flocculant yeast will clear the beer quickly, while I've had to wait a bit longer for S05 and Denny's Favorite. But even so, most beers are packaged at my house by day 10.

I have a couple of recipes that are better with some age (my oatmeal stout and my Belgian triple) but they age just fine in the bottle or keg.

If a beer is made well, there isn't any reason to leave it sit more than a couple of days after it's done. It probably won't hurt, though I'm unsure of the yeast character after a month-long primary.

I've heard on here that several people have posted that their best beers spent a month in the primary. That could be true. But I wonder if some of the improvement could simply be better brewing techniques and not just a super-long primary. I've heard this anecdotal evidence, but never seen any scientific evidence or even a one-to-one comparison.

If someone REALLY wants to know if a month long primary actually results in better tasting beer, I'd suggest two batches side by side. One bottled on day 12, one bottled on day 30. Then a blind taste test. Maybe then I'd be convinced, but at this point I don't believe it.

I am brewing my first lager this weekend. Does your opinion hold true for lagers, or is that a separate matter?

 

[Malticulous]

Here is a quote from John Palmer.
http://www.homebrewersassociation.o...g/pages/lets-brew/ask-the-experts/john-palmer

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.

He is talking about both ale and lager. Not to sound dumb, but lagers do need to be lagered. If you understand the primary fermentation you can get them lagering sooner and then have them ready in less time. My lagers are best at six weeks. That's nearly five weeks at 32F.

 

[RJS]

Agreed all around here. Im at 2-3 weeks primary, straight to keg. I never did trust the krausen gunk on the sides of the fermenter.

Awesome replies people

 

[Piratwolf]

I got sucked in to the 1-month plan for a little while (21 day primary, 7-10 day bottle carb) but have gone back to my earlier practice of 8-10 days + 7 in bottle. My beer definitely improved when I went to longer primary, but since changing I don't see any quality decrease. It may be as one post said: my beer got better b/c i learned to brew better, not b/c of the extended primary. My guess is that it has been using starters and careful temp control that made the difference; both practices became standard for me at the time I began extended primary.

 

[Yooper]

I am brewing my first lager this weekend. Does your opinion hold true for lagers, or is that a separate matter?

Malticulous answered this, but I wanted to expand just a tad.

I always use a "secondary" for lagers, and do NOT keep the beer on the yeast cake during the lagering. I pitch enough healthy yeast for the beer at 46-48 degrees, and allow the beer to raise to 50 degrees where it stays until about 75% finished. Then I raise the temp for a diacetyl rest if I'm doing one. I usually do a diacetyl rest. After the diacetyl rest, the beer is racked and lagering begun. I lager for about one week for each 8-10 points of OG.

I've used both carboys and kegs for lagering with good results.

I've read on the forum that some brewers lager right on the yeast cake, but I never did. Just like leaving the beer in primary for a month (which I wouldn't do), I wouldn't leave it lagering on the yeast for a month or two. It may taste ok, but since lagers are supposed to be so clean and crisp and without yeast character that it makes sense to me to rack off of it before lagering. It might not hurt it, but I can't see how it could help either.