How Do Commercial Brewers Ferment Quickly?

[oldschool]

This. detail, detail, detail.

Last night I was drinking an IPA that I made on August 3. That's common for me, but usually I am drinking a dryhopped beer on about day 20 at the latest.

I'll agree that some beers take some more conditioning time than others, but a well made beer (proper yeast pitch, proper fermentation temperature, quality ingredients, good water, etc) doesn't need as much time as is being preached around here. If you make a beer with good technique, a month in the primary is ridiculous.

 

[oldschool]

I know a local brewery that makes a very good IIPA with WLP001 and they are cold crashing on day 5. Why they dryhop cold I don't know. As a matter of fact I disagree with it but whatever. This is about fermentation not dry hopping.,

 

[pcollins]

I know a local brewery that makes a very good IIPA with WLP001 and they are cold crashing on day 5. Why they dryhop cold I don't know. As a matter of fact I disagree with it but whatever. This is about fermentation not dry hopping.,

If they didn't dry hop cold it would take longer. It's a commercial brewery. Time is money.

 

[Yooper]

If they didn't dry hop cold it would take longer. It's a commercial brewery. Time is money.

I think it's vice versa- it takes longer to dryhop cold than warm.

 

[pcollins]

I think it's vice versa- it takes longer to dryhop cold than warm.

In reality, yes. But this is "commercial" reality.

If you can combine two processes and achieve the "same" result then why not? They can cold crash (which they have to do) AND dry hop (which is optional) at the same time. They can still advertise that the beer is dry hopped and maintain their time lines while doing it. According to oldschool the IIPA is very good.

 

[samc]

I ferment, dry hop & cold condition until the beer is done. Every beer and ferment is different but in general most of my beers are drinkable by 3 weeks, seems to get better up till about 8 weeks and stay the same until done if any is left. Some beers with multiple dry hop additions taste much better early, before they lose the pop.

 

[hatrickwah]

There are many factors... pitching rates, temperatures, time, and CHEMISTRY. A lot of brewers will use additional products to expedite processes. Irish moss for the home brew, but more often its isinglass at transfer to aging tanks in the brewery. And NO, a brewery does NOT have to filter to get a crystal beer in a short period. 3 weeks with isinglass can have a nice resulting beer. No matter what the argument, there are a million angles to come from. I'm getting incredible results right now with liquid yeasts, about 7-10 days at 68 degrees, and a cold crash for 3-4 days at 43, while my beer isn't crystal at the 2 week point, by the time I'm really digging into it at 3 weeks, its awesome. Granted, my beers are your basic blondes and ambers usually, but when I can see the scratch in my nail through my blonde, I'm not complaining. BTW, no isinglass in my beer, just your trusty irish moss.

This brew was just over 3 weeks old.

 

[scottland]

Stone says they ferment at the mid-70s. Their pale done in something like 3 or 4 days.

Yup, if I remember from the tour, their conicals were either 300bbl or 600bbl. 9,000-18,000 gallons worth of pressure lets them get away with that. For us homebrewers, we have to go much cooler.

 

[ChillWill]

Depends on gravity. Cask conditioned beer in the UK (breweries I've worked at) will ferment for 3 to 4 days, put into bright tank with some finings and cooled (to around 45?) Overnight, then it's into cask for 7 days before sending off to pubs, although I'm not even sure they keep them for as long as 7 days sometimes.

 

[FoundlingOfDollar]

Well brewed beer, correct amount of healthy ACTIVE yeast and the correct fermentation conditions will produce quality beer quickly. I'm astonished that the "months in primary" flash mob has taken over this forum. Beers below 1.060 that spend two weeks in the primary (one week at 62 degrees and one week at D-rest temps) will turn out fantastic.

I think long primaries are pretty good advice for those of us new to to hobby. I have no temperature control beyond my house's climate control and a swamp cooler, and I am still perfecting many of my techniques including pitching rate and pitching at the right time for my starter to get the best performance. While this is still the case for me, a month long primary and a good long bottle conditioning help to cover the faults in my process. This is why I think you see long primaries advocated the most in the beginner's forum. It is no wonder that people who began in the beginner's forums and had a lot of success with long primaries will go out and advise in favor of long primaries.

I would be hesitant to call it a "mob" or a "takeover" when this very thread is flourishing and no one has yet shown up to tell you that you're "doing it wrong". Rather, I would point out that this very thread is educating members about other methods and processes. I don't think you could argue that long primaries are necessarily hurting anyone's beers, but here you are putting it out there that if people improve their process they don't necessarily need a long primary.

 

[Germelli1]

I think long primaries are pretty good advice for those of us new to to hobby. I have no temperature control beyond my house's climate control and a swamp cooler, and I am still perfecting many of my techniques including pitching rate and pitching at the right time for my starter to get the best performance. While this is still the case for me, a month long primary and a good long bottle conditioning help to cover the faults in my process. This is why I think you see long primaries advocated the most in the beginner's forum. It is no wonder that people who began in the beginner's forums and had a lot of success with long primaries will go out and advise in favor of long primaries.

I would be hesitant to call it a "mob" or a "takeover" when this very thread is flourishing and no one has yet shown up to tell you that you're "doing it wrong". Rather, I would point out that this very thread is educating members about other methods and processes. I don't think you could argue that long primaries are necessarily hurting anyone's beers, but here you are putting it out there that if people improve their process they don't necessarily need a long primary.

Your post completely hits the nail on the head. I personally primary for 10-14 days on most of my beers, but only because I have my processes down and can control most variables. If you are a new brewer and are still getting the hang of things, then time on the primary yeast cake can heal many flaws and off flavors!

 

[SickTransitMundus]

It depends on the beer, and your personal preferences. A properly made pale ale or a wheat should have a 3-4 week grain-to-glass time, including carbonation. Bigger beers need more time to reach final gravity and age. The bottlenecks in my pipeline are the size of my kegerator and the number of empty kegs available, so I often just leave the beer on the yeast cake until I have an open slot.

 

[corkybstewart]

As I mentioned, if you have proper process, 1.5 weeks in primary should be fine.


Long primaries, IMHO, are workarounds for not properly dealing with process issues on the front end.

Not necessarily. I started doing very long primaries 12 years ago when my job kept me away from home for weeks at a time. I found that 3-4 weeks in primary and direct to keg made my beer much better than it had been racking to secondary as soon as it got to FG. This was also long before I had internet brewing forums, and I had still never met another homebrewer except the guy I bought my first equipment from(who was a terrible brewer).

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Not necessarily. I started doing very long primaries 12 years ago when my job kept me away from home for weeks at a time. I found that 3-4 weeks in primary and direct to keg made my beer much better than it had been racking to secondary as soon as it got to FG. This was also long before I had internet brewing forums, and I had still never met another homebrewer except the guy I bought my first equipment from(who was a terrible brewer).

Can I assume that you?

1) Were making starters and pitching enough yeast.
2) Properly aerating.
3) Were diligently controlling ferment temps.
4) Were able to rack to secondary without introducing oxygen.

I'm not saying that the long primaries are bad, I'm just saying that they're not necessary if you control everything else. Likewise, secondary isn't really necessary.

I go straight from primary to keg typically anywhere from 13-24 days from pitching (depending on gravity & whether I dry-hop), and I see no potential benefit to my beer from leaving it longer. The beer is clean, fully fermented, and tastes great at that point.

 

[corkybstewart]

I was making starters.
I was aerating well
Had never heard of temp control-the guy I bought mys stuff from told me room temp was best. He also brewed and sold kits that consisted of 1 can of extract, 1.5 pounds of corn sugar and "just use the yeast stuck to the top of the can."
No oxidation problems ever.
The only difference was that when I would get home eventually I never knew how long I'd be home so I would keg immediately(assuming the beer was at FG). Next time I got home my beer was ready to drink. The only part of my process that changed was not racking to secondary when the beer got to FG, all else was equal.

 

[broadbill]

Had never heard of temp control-the guy I bought mys stuff from told me room temp was best.

Just a guess, but that is why your beers were benefitting from 3-4 weeks of sitting in the primary.

 

[AnOldUR]

I found that 3-4 weeks in primary and direct to keg made my beer much better than it had been racking to secondary as soon as it got to FG.

And what about this? I don't think that anyone is disputing that the beer should be left on the yeast for a few days after FG is reached. It's the necessity four 3-4 weeks that's in contention.

 

[ACbrewer]

The reading this thread has me thinking a few thoughts.

yes, brewers without good 02 (really need pure 02 and stone - see Yeast by CW and JZ), without temp control (CW+JZ) and poor pitch rates (CW+JZ) certianly can benifit from longer primary's for standard gravities (below 1.060). - also if you primary 7 to 10 and secondary 7 to 14 then it is 14 to 24 days before bottling +1 week... It really is more perhaps a "don't bother with secondary" more than 'do a long primary'

I wonder though if everyone could 'bennifit' but then is it worth it? Let's face it, if you can have a good beer at say 95% Awesome in 3 weeks, do you want to wait til 6 weeks for 99% Awesome? Is it worth it?

Also sure major brewery can go from grain to glass in less than 28 days (heck Bud goes from field to glass in less than 28 days), but is it a beer you want to drink? Does rushing it by a commercial brewery mean that the beer is only 80% Awesome... although that could be due to the fact that it is a comerical brew and is suited to everyones pallet, not the specific homebrewer. My beer for me is 95+ Awesome... but others finding it closer to 60....

Lastly, I've done beer in 3 weeks. Mr. Beer kits have done that. Beer was better than what I would have purchased (imho). I probably could do that now, but I find that for a varriaty of reasons I'm ok with long primaries and no secondaries.

Just some semi random thoughts

 

[corkybstewart]

I don't know how long you guys have been brewing but when I started back in the early 90's there was the old 1-2-3 rule, there wasn't even a need for a hydrometer. Luckily my job didn't let me follow that rule. But as I said several posts ago now I let my beer sit for a week after getting to FG, that's all.