Fermentation question

[Joey-j0j0]

I just brewed my first batch of beer on Sunday. Monday morning, I had bubbles going in the airlock, so I was happy. Tuesday morning, bubbles were very slow. Tuesday afternoon, no bubbles. Is my first batch of beer ruined?

 

[frazier]

No, your first batch of beer is doing fine. Now back away, give it about three more weeks, then aim to bottle. No worries!

 

[headbanger]

No, your first batch of beer is doing fine. Now back away, give it about three more weeks, then aim to bottle. No worries!

+1, you're doing just fine

 

[iaefebs]

Look at the toolbar above..... see the search tab? Type .... no bubbles in airlock.. or type.. no bubbles ... or bubbles

 

[Joey-j0j0]

I feel better now, but I was wondering: Do I need to adjust my brew schedule because of this? I was planning on moving to a secondary fermentor in 6ish days. Should I wait longer now?

 

[Revvy]

I feel better now, but I was wondering: Do I need to adjust my brew schedule because of this? I was planning on moving to a secondary fermentor in 6ish days. Should I wait longer now?

You don't do anything to your beer based on a calender, yeast can't read, so they don't know when they are supposed to be ready.

You determine when to rack (if you choose to) by taking two consequetive HYDROMETER readings over a three day period. If the gravity is the same, then it is finished fermenting.

I recommend folks don't even take their first one til day 12 and the next one on day 14 and then rack to secondary if you are choosing too. Many of us don't secondary, and opt for a month long primary instead.

Just like you don't use an airlock to determine if fermentation is occuring, you don't arbitrarily do anything to your beer based on a calender.

 

[flanken]

I have my beer fermenting in a 6 gallon plastic bucket for primary and keep reading different things about the amount of time to leave it in there before bottling.

Palmer's "how to brew" recommends no more than 3 weeks in a primary vessel or the yeast will start to ferment the contents of the trub and / or undergo autolysis "after very long times"... Not sure how long is "very" long to be worrying about autolysis...

Anyway, my big question is does 3 vs 4 vs 5 weeks in primary make a positive or negative difference, and is there a good general amount of time to wait before bottling?

 

[bgrayson726]

Chapter 22 of Palmer's "How to Brew"

 

[flanken]

Chapter 22 of Palmer's "How to Brew"

I only have access to howtobrew.com which only goes to chapter 21.

Does the print edition have more content?

 

[bgrayson726]

Yep, it has a whole chapter titled "Is My Beer Ruined?"

 

[NWMOBrewer]

Leaving it in primary for a month or longer won't have any negative effects. I wouldn't go more than 6 weeks personally, but there are numerous stories of extra long primaries that haven't had a problem. If you want, boil a batch, split it between some number of fermenters, bottle each at a different time, and see which tastes better.

 

[Revvy]

I have my beer fermenting in a 6 gallon plastic bucket for primary and keep reading different things about the amount of time to leave it in there before bottling.

Palmer's "how to brew" recommends no more than 3 weeks in a primary vessel or the yeast will start to ferment the contents of the trub and / or undergo autolysis "after very long times"... Not sure how long is "very" long to be worrying about autolysis...

Anyway, my big question is does 3 vs 4 vs 5 weeks in primary make a positive or negative difference, and is there a good general amount of time to wait before bottling?

Actually that's outdated information. He has back changed his tune on that for quite awhile.

He admitted he got it wrong. and has changed it in subesquent editions.

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 is where the latest discussion and all your questions answered.
We have multiple threads about this all over the place.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/

Here's the conversation Palmer and Jamil had on Brewstrong, where he admits to causing mass hysteria among you noobs.

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.

We basically proved that old theory wrong on here 5 years ago, and now the rest fo the brewing community is catching up. Though a lot of old dogs don't tend to follow the latest news, and perpetuate the old stuff.

The 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. And I recently bottled a beer that sat in primary for 5.5 months with no ill effects.....

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. I remember the "scandal" it caused i the letters to the editor's section a month later, it was just like how it was here when we began discussing it, except a lot more civil than it was here. But after the Byo/Basic brewing experiment, they started reflecting it in their recipes.

 

[Moonraker]

{Long and devastating argument}.

Ok, I'm convinced. But just to be clear, for dry-hopping using only a primary, wait for fermentation to stop, add hops, wait a couple of weeks before bottling?

 

[Revvy]

Ok, I'm convinced. But just to be clear, for dry-hopping using only a primary, wait for fermentation to stop, add hops, wait a couple of weeks before bottling?

One week for dry hopping regardless of where. SO if it's in primary and you're leaving the beer for a month, then week three.

 

[flanken]

Great feedback Revvy thanks for the info and quotes. It's time I go buy a hard copy of the book. I've been reading the web version religiously for the past few months trying to learn as much as I can.

At this point I'm like a little time capsule from 1999 with the old stuff floating in my head.