I'm bringing back the "Is secondary necessary?" argument

[Zixxer10R]

This weekend i had a nice conversation with my LHBS owner about how i wasn't secondary-ing any longer just because i had been convinced on this forum that most people aren't using this step any longer.

My LHBS owner convinced me to continue using this step because of a few reasons, but cheif among them was the fact that the simple science behind moving your beer off of the spent yeast will yield better beer. I mean, if you started eating your own waste, the final "out"come ( ) wouldn't be pretty either.

I realize that i'll get flamed almost immediately, but i'm gonna say this anyway. At least in the beginning of the "no secondary" trend, the primary reason for the trend beginning was because people are lazy and didn't feel like taking a few minutes to rack the beer off the trub layer.

There, i said it. Let the flaming begin.

 

[Germelli1]

It sounds like you LHBS owner is stuck with the outdated information that has been covered here probably 500 times. I am not trying to flame but I figured someone starting a thread like this would have at least a little bit of decent information rather than what some dude said who clearly has little knowledge of the science behind yeast.

 

[Revvy]

3-5 threads a day about this aren't enough for you?

Just read this. Every debate, discussion, scientific reason, argument, reargument, re-discussion, re-debate, and every guestion has been done ad nauseum in that thread, and about a thousand others, but that one seems to be the best.

Heck, just print it out and hand it to him. Or just let him believe what he believe, and believe what you believe.

Do you really feel the need to re-invent the wheel for the 30 millionth time? We've been talking about it for 4 years on here. There's plenty of information on here already without rehashing the same useless arguments over and over.

 

[Airborneguy]

If you feel the need, then do it. I never understood arguing about what other people do with their beer. Who cares?

 

[smalliewader]

I have tried the whole longer primary thing and honestly, I tend to like my beers better that I secondary. I think they taste a little more "cleaner" when I secondary. I figure there's still yeast going to the secondary to do clean up duty. I know guys are making great beer without them, but to each his own. I personally like to secondary.

 

[Homercidal]

Your LHBS is a moron!

Yeah, I suck at flaming.

Actually, I would not want to leave my beer on the yeast past the point where it will create a negative situation either. He is right in saying that the yeast will die and cause bad flavors. I think nearly everyone will agree that a certain amount of dead yeast will make your beer taste bad.

Here is what I know to be true: I have left my beer on the yeast in the primary for up to 3 months to no ill effect.

I do not have equipment that allows me to do measurements, but I believe a few things to be true: You are eating yeast excrement in every batch. I don't believe that the yeast will necessarily create a bad flavor out of the metabolism of dead yeast product. In fact, I think that they very likely turn some of that stuff into other, more beneificial products.

It's just as likely that not having living yeast to help clean up will result in the dead yeast contributing MORE bad flavors, since those dead yeast cells will just continue to contribute their rottenness with no option of changing it into anything else.

In the interest of keeping this short, I think that yeast can live many more weeks than previously thought, and as long as they do, they will not only perform conditioning of the beer, but conditioning of their former selves. And all the while, your beer is clearing and the yeast cake compacting.

I would not like to go past, say 3 months, because at some point you WILL get some nasties. I just don't think it's going to be in the 3-6 weeks or so that I usually primary my beers for.

For long term aging, I'll secondary into a carboy and top with CO2.

 

[bruin_ale]

I've been mightily underwhelmed by LHBS owners' knowledge these days.
The "eating your own waste" argument makes no sense. The waste - or byproducts of fermentation are EXACTLY what we want the yeast there to work on longer. The point at which they start eating themselves is what we want to prevent (autolysis). Many here, myself included, have left beers in primary for a couple months without detectable flavors from autolysis. If you want to bring back this argument, you should do a 10 gallon batch, split it into two and do one with secondary and one without. Then blind taste test and see which is the better beer. That certainly won't "put it to rest", but it might help you decide if you think it makes a difference.

 

[PVH]

I like to secondary to remove the ethanol waste produced by the yeast.

 

[scottland]

I've been mightily underwhelmed by LHBS owners' knowledge these days.

I have nothing else to add.

 

[bwomp313]

I mean, if you started eating your own waste, the final "out"come ( ) wouldn't be pretty either.

Yeast poop and human poop are not the same thing. Yeast poop is delicious. Human poop; not so much.

 

[bwomp313]

....Errr....I mean...not that I like...know about that or anything. The uh.... human poop thing I mean...

 

[cmoon]

I like to secondary to remove the ethanol waste produced by the yeast.

You can always reduce the ethanol waste ratio by adding extra hydrogen dioxide to your boil (helps lower OG, check if your LHBS carries it though.)

 

[ArcaneXor]

You can always reduce the ethanol waste ratio by adding extra hydrogen dioxide to your boil (helps lower OG, check if your LHBS carries it though.)

Hydrogen dioxide? Don't you mean Dihydrogen monoxide?

 

[makomachine]

Beer has water, grain, hops, and yeast in it. Maybe seaweed or a fruit if I'm feeling froggy. Anything that sounds scientifical or man createdish stays the frick out!

It's still moving by the way, so continue to kick if you like!

 

[weirdboy]

Wow I want to see the valence diagram for hydrogen dioxide.

 

[Yuri_Rage]

3-5 threads a day about this aren't enough for you?

Just read this. Every debate, discussion, scientific reason, argument, reargument, re-discussion, re-debate, and every guestion has been done ad nauseum in that thread, and about a thousand others, but that one seems to be the best.

Heck, just print it out and hand it to him. Or just let him believe what he believe, and believe what you believe.

Do you really feel the need to re-invent the wheel for the 30 millionth time? We've been talking about it for 4 years on here. There's plenty of information on here already without rehashing the same useless arguments over and over.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_rules_regulations

Rules #5 and #13

 

[cmoon]

Hydrogen dioxide? Don't you mean Dihydrogen monoxide?

Crap!

Wow I want to see the valence diagram for hydrogen dioxide.

Yeah, that'd be one helluva hydrogen atom.

 

[azscoob]

Too much dihydrogen monoxide in your beer will make it taste... runny

 

[ArcaneXor]

Too much dihydrogen monoxide in your beer will make it taste... runny

Not to mention its effect on the wetness factor!

 

[theo1069]

Your LHBS makes money from selling you something called a "Secondary Fermenter." Therefore it is in his best interest to give you advice that would end in you buying additional equipment from his business.

You can read forums and scientific research until your eyes bleed. If you are really curious, split your next batch in half. Leave one half in primary for a month, and secondary the other after final gravity has been reached. I would bet the majority of us could not tell the difference.

 

[ArcaneXor]

Your LHBS makes money from selling you something called a "Secondary Fermenter." Therefore it is in his best interest to give you advice that would end in you buying additional equipment from his business.

Nobody at the store I work would do this. It's in our interest to help customers make the best beer possible so that they come back and become regulars, instead of us making $20 more up front but losing their business because they find out we gave them bad advice.

 

[Homercidal]

Nobody at the store I work would do this. It's in our interest to help customers make the best beer possible so that they come back and become regulars, instead of us making $20 more up front but losing their business because they find out we gave them bad advice.

I suspect most stores are like this, but consider that using a secondary is not necessarily bad advice, but at worst a simple unnecessary extra step. it would be hard to find any fault with using a secondary beyond the very low possibility of introducing an infection or Oxygen (if you were a careful, informed brewer).

I think he probably just believes that a secondary is a tried and true process to keep your beer from tasting like hot dogs. Old information.

 

[Yooper]

My feeling is in the middle. I rarely do a secondary these days for ales, but I also never go over three weeks in the fermenter. For a lager, I always but always rack off of the yeast cake after the diacetyl rest.

Remember that yeast imparts a flavor to the beer, and that's part of the beer's profile. When yeast are pitched, they reproduce, ferment and yes, begin to die. Just like humans. We are born, and we begin to age and die immediately.

It's not like all 200000000000 billion (or whatever) of the yeast die at once. But yes, if you were to look under a microscope you'd see yeast in all phases including autolysis. Will the beer taste bad because of a few yeast autolyzing? No, of course not. But how do you know how many yeast are in what phase?

To me it's just good practice to pitch the proper amount of yeast in the beginning, keep the fermentation temperature controlled, and package the beer when the fermentation is finished and the beer is clear. Since I do that usually by about day 14, I never worry about a secondary or flavors from autolysis.

I don't really see an advantage to join the "month in primary" club. It may not hurt your beer, but I have yet to see ONE scientific study that says it will help. Having a couple of people tell me that it didn't hurt is anecdotal, and I believe it, but I still don't see a benefit.

If you want to keep your beer in the fermenter a long long time, that's fine. If you choose a bright tank ("secondary" is a misnomer), that's fine too. Whatever works for you is what's the "best" technique.

For me, a 10-14 day window in the fermenter is great for all of my beers. For ales, they are then packaged. For lagers, they are racked after the diacetyl rest and lagering begun. That's what works for me.

 

[Toga]

I think he probably just believes that a secondary is a tried and true process to keep your beer from tasting like hot dogs. Old information.

MMMMMMmm Hot dog beer

 

[Hefanatic]

My feeling is in the middle. I rarely do a secondary these days for ales, but I also never go over three weeks in the fermenter. For a lager, I always but always rack off of the yeast cake after the diacetyl rest.

Remember that yeast imparts a flavor to the beer, and that's part of the beer's profile. When yeast are pitched, they reproduce, ferment and yes, begin to die. Just like humans. We are born, and we begin to age and die immediately.

It's not like all 200000000000 billion (or whatever) of the yeast die at once. But yes, if you were to look under a microscope you'd see yeast in all phases including autolysis. Will the beer taste bad because of a few yeast autolyzing? No, of course not. But how do you know how many yeast are in what phase?

To me it's just good practice to pitch the proper amount of yeast in the beginning, keep the fermentation temperature controlled, and package the beer when the fermentation is finished and the beer is clear. Since I do that usually by about day 14, I never worry about a secondary or flavors from autolysis.

I don't really see an advantage to join the "month in primary" club. It may not hurt your beer, but I have yet to see ONE scientific study that says it will help. Having a couple of people tell me that it didn't hurt is anecdotal, and I believe it, but I still don't see a benefit.

If you want to keep your beer in the fermenter a long long time, that's fine. If you choose a bright tank ("secondary" is a misnomer), that's fine too. Whatever works for you is what's the "best" technique.

For me, a 10-14 day window in the fermenter is great for all of my beers. For ales, they are then packaged. For lagers, they are racked after the diacetyl rest and lagering begun. That's what works for me.

+ 1. Nicely worded.

 

[Hugh_Jass]

My feeling is in the middle. I rarely do a secondary these days for ales, but I also never go over three weeks in the fermenter. For a lager, I always but always rack off of the yeast cake after the diacetyl rest.

Remember that yeast imparts a flavor to the beer, and that's part of the beer's profile. When yeast are pitched, they reproduce, ferment and yes, begin to die. Just like humans. We are born, and we begin to age and die immediately.

It's not like all 200000000000 billion (or whatever) of the yeast die at once. But yes, if you were to look under a microscope you'd see yeast in all phases including autolysis. Will the beer taste bad because of a few yeast autolyzing? No, of course not. But how do you know how many yeast are in what phase?

To me it's just good practice to pitch the proper amount of yeast in the beginning, keep the fermentation temperature controlled, and package the beer when the fermentation is finished and the beer is clear. Since I do that usually by about day 14, I never worry about a secondary or flavors from autolysis.

I don't really see an advantage to join the "month in primary" club. It may not hurt your beer, but I have yet to see ONE scientific study that says it will help. Having a couple of people tell me that it didn't hurt is anecdotal, and I believe it, but I still don't see a benefit.

If you want to keep your beer in the fermenter a long long time, that's fine. If you choose a bright tank ("secondary" is a misnomer), that's fine too. Whatever works for you is what's the "best" technique.

For me, a 10-14 day window in the fermenter is great for all of my beers. For ales, they are then packaged. For lagers, they are racked after the diacetyl rest and lagering begun. That's what works for me.

The dominatrix brewer has spoken.......well said Yoop.

IMO, if you pitch the proper amount of fresh, healthy yeast into a properly sanitized container and control ferment temps, there should be very few of the "off flavors" for the yeast to re-digest.

10-14 days is my window for ales in primary, too. OTOH, after the beer is racked, it usually sits in a keg for a month or two. I guess that would be considered a bright tank.

Edited to add it really isn't, or shouldn't be, an argument. It's your beer, treat it how you choose.

 

[PVH]

How about we put together a bunch of triangle taste tests with split batches of 1.050 or so beer, identical in all respects except one was racked to secondary after some time (1 week? 2 weeks?) and sat in secondary for 2 more weeks. The other half will remain in primary the whole time. When we find out that no one can tell the difference, we can more confidently proclaim "do whatever works for you."

Or maybe this has already been done . . .

 

[Seven]

If you want to keep your beer in the fermenter a long long time, that's fine. If you choose a bright tank ("secondary" is a misnomer), that's fine too. Whatever works for you is what's the "best" technique.

For me, a 10-14 day window in the fermenter is great for all of my beers. For ales, they are then packaged. For lagers, they are racked after the diacetyl rest and lagering begun. That's what works for me.

What do you do for stouts? I have a stout that is supposed to age for 4-months. I'm not a fan of using secondaries because I feel it's another opportunity to introduce infection/oxidation. Just curious what others do in this case.

 

[shuckit]

Love that graphic.

Edit: Opps, just saw the mods comment. So I removed my comment, but I like the horse.

 

[Yooper]

What do you do for stouts? I have a stout that is supposed to age for 4-months. I'm not a fan of using secondaries because I feel it's another opportunity to introduce infection/oxidation. Just curious what others do in this case.

For me, I have a kegging system. Like Hugh_Jass, I use the keg for the bright tank on beers like my oatmeal stout that need some time for the flavors to meld.

My oatmeal stout is clear and "done" by day 14. But it's definitely not ready to chill, tap, and drink. It's got some uneven roasty flavor that definitely needs some time. I still keg it, but set it aside for about 2-3 weeks and then put in the kegerator to cold condition and carb up.

It can age just fine in the bottle (after all, a keg is really a big bottle) if you bottled then and didn't want to use an aging vessel.