Noob 2nd Fermentation

[Gamer]

Like most of us noobs, I read and read about each part of the brew process. I really lean to believe people who post a lot, REV and a few others for example. 2nd fermentation was one of the parts I was working on figuring out. My opinion and future brewing will include secondaries. Each and every time. I haven't brewed since the 90's when secondaries was unheard by my buddies.

To figure it out for myself, I brewed two batches of Caribou Slobber at the same time. Fermenater was 66-68 degrees. One was in primary for 4 weeks one was in primary for 10 days and 21 days in secondary. 1 week to carb, poured both in a clean glass. The primary was slightly mirky, the secondary was not. The secondary also tasted a lot crisper and more finished/polished of a beer; three seperate people taste tested for me. No I didnt run any scientific tests with photon accelerators or Star Trek gismo, simply looked at the beer and tasted. Both brews were done at the same time (managing 2 seperate brews on the stove was a bit hectic), better bottle primarys and glass secondary.

All new guys, don't fall into the trap of believing what you read as being the gospel.. brew your own and decide yourself. Keep in mind that the old guys keg, which most likely does the SAME thing as the secondaries they preach against.

 

[HibsMax]

It sounds like you brewed two batches rather than splitting one batch. Is it not conceivable that one batch was always going to be better than the other, no matter what process you used for fermentation?

Also, without you using and photon accelerators I doubt anyone will take your findings seriously.

 

[WileECoyote]

Hello Gamer,
Me being new and reading tons trying to figure it all out, is not easy, I do have thoughts on this matter, I believe that leaving the beer in the primary fermenter on the yeast cake for 2 weeks instead of 1 week, then letting it clarify, finnish and age a bit in a 2nd fermenter (a week or even 2 or more) makes sense to me, this way IMO you are utilizing the best of both methods and getting a more finished beer.
I think its just one of those opinion things too, thats the great thing about brewing your own beer, you can tailer it to the way you like it and brew it how ever you like to, it boils down to opinion.

And yes I am using a photon accelerator chamber for fermenting my beer. lol

Thanks for posting Gamer!
The more information, the better.
WiliECoyote

 

[Gamer]

Anyone have and idea on how to run a test to prove the co2 headspace thing? Read many different thoughts on it and cant get it down. I read that if you move brew to a 2nd, enough co2 will be released to protect the beer. Also read that co2 may be heavier, but air will mix with co2 so the barrior is a myth. All over says blast co2 from a tank and rack under that. I'm willing to do the tests, just have no idea how to do this one. I have no plans to buy a co2 tank.

 

[Revvy]

I don't keg......I bottle. And my beer is crystal clear.

 

[Revvy]

It sounds like you brewed two batches rather than splitting one batch. Is it not conceivable that one batch was always going to be better than the other, no matter what process you used for fermentation?

Since we say repeatedly that every batch and every fermentation is different, then like Max said, it's hardly a good comparrison.

Az or Irregularpulse actually split a batch as a true experiment, and submitted for contests. If you want a TRUE comparrison, find that thread.

But it's your beer, do what you want. But don't make generalizations like, "The old folks keg" because if you've read my bottling sticky, or anything I've written then you must know that's clearly not the case.

 

[wilsojos]

I was just reading palmer, how to brew, this morning and it said there would be enough to protect the beer. However, I think the assumption is 6.5 gal primary, 5 gal secondary. I think you could definitely fill the headspace on 5, but not sure about 6.5.

By the way, I bottled a caribou slobber yesterday with 19 days in primary only...I'll let you know how it turns out.

 

[Gamer]

Revvy, you sound like my wife. Every post isnt a personal attack on you. I do enjoy your posts.

 

[amandabab]

Gamer, you won't win the secondary debate here, just brew the best beer.

Long primaries are a religion.

 

[Gamer]

Gamer, you won't win the secondary debate here, just brew the best beer.

Long primaries are a religion.

Hitler made meek people believe what he wanted by screaming, distorting any view not his. Well believe or be scared to voice opposition. Didn't make him correct.

Just saying I have 2 beers here in my hand, and dispite the extreme vocal comments on this forum and whatever book revision by Palmer (surely if we wait another 2 years he'll change to suggesting tertiary conditioning), 1 beer is better than the other. Wish we have some type of hoembrew sharing network, cause I'd really like to try some of the 'old guys' beer. I'm sure it rocks.

 

[HibsMax]

Hitler made meek people believe what he wanted by screaming, distorting any view not his. Well believe or be scared to voice opposition. Didn't make him correct.

Just saying I have 2 beers here in my hand, and dispite the extreme vocal comments on this forum and whatever book revision by Palmer (surely if we wait another 2 years he'll change to suggesting tertiary conditioning), 1 beer is better than the other. Wish we have some type of hoembrew sharing network, cause I'd really like to try some of the 'old guys' beer. I'm sure it rocks.

I am pretty sure it wouldn't make any difference to your results but your test was flawed; you should repeat the test with one batch split into two. I am not saying that as some sort of primary-only evangelist, I've only just got into the hobby myself. As things stand right now I am using primaries only except when I want to add fruit or something. If after a few months I find that "something is missing", perhaps I will do a similar test and see which I prefer - I'm all about testing things out for myself as well as listening to those who have more experience.

As an aside, I personally think it's a mistake to bring Hitler into the discussion. Believe me when I tell you that I am not being overly sensitive about this. It's just a name that does little else other than stir up emotion and some people might think that you are drawing comparisons between him and they....something which I am quite certain you're not doing.

EDIT : if someone brewed two batches and the primary-only tasted better than the secondary one, would that prove that secondaries are unnecessary? Or would it just mean that in this particular instance it worked out that way? I really think that there are arguments for and against each method and there are easily as many opinions as there are contributors.

 

[Draken]

Like most of us noobs, I read and read about each part of the brew process. I really lean to believe people who post a lot, REV and a few others for example. 2nd fermentation was one of the parts I was working on figuring out. My opinion and future brewing will include secondaries. Each and every time. I haven't brewed since the 90's when secondaries was unheard by my buddies.

To figure it out for myself, I brewed two batches of Caribou Slobber at the same time. Fermenater was 66-68 degrees. One was in primary for 4 weeks one was in primary for 10 days and 21 days in secondary. 1 week to carb, poured both in a clean glass. The primary was slightly mirky, the secondary was not. The secondary also tasted a lot crisper and more finished/polished of a beer; three seperate people taste tested for me. No I didnt run any scientific tests with photon accelerators or Star Trek gismo, simply looked at the beer and tasted. Both brews were done at the same time (managing 2 seperate brews on the stove was a bit hectic), better bottle primarys and glass secondary.

All new guys, don't fall into the trap of believing what you read as being the gospel.. brew your own and decide yourself. Keep in mind that the old guys keg, which most likely does the SAME thing as the secondaries they preach against.

I am not sure what you are doing, but all my primary only beers are crystal clear. Also a week to carb? Well try the same test giving the beer adequate time to carb, like 3@70. Then let it chill for at least a week. Then taste them. 1 week to carb, even the slightest difference in temp is going to cause a huge difference in flavor. It's obvious your technique can use some work, so get that down first, then do a valid test splitting one batch.

 

[johnp]

Nobody should fault you for using a secondary.

If you had some solid evidence proving your results, that would be great, but your experiment did not provide that.

Kegging may act as a type of tertiary storage tank, but it's not a secondary in the sense of the term in common use. Either way I don't think anyone is preaching secondaries as wrong, simply providing advise as to their being unnecessary.

Also I would assume Revy knows that not all posts are directed at him, but to be fair you did mention him by name in your OP. (edit: maybe you meant the other rev sorry )

 

[WileECoyote]

Gamer, you won't win the secondary debate here, just brew the best beer.

Long primaries are a religion.

I Agree with amandabab here, No one will ever win this debate, and it won't matter if anyone dose a split batch test, cuz its a taste thing, some people will like the taste of one over the other and others will like the other more than the one.

But I have to say, almost everyone says, age makes your beer better, so in a way it almost makes it a contradiction in terms - using a primary fermenter only, unless your aging longer on primary. Different beers (light to heavy) make aging difference too, from what I have read.

Make good beer, Be happy!
All information is good, all opinions are good too, I read lots, take what information and or opinions I think will get me the best results and combine them to work for me, then use it, then tweak it, hopefully to perfection, this method worked Great for me in racing cars, yes I did win a lot and yes I did win championships using it, and yes what I did was way out in left field compared to what most were doing, but it worked well for me, and Im going to apply this same tactic to brewing Great beer, I hope.

I only said this to maybe help new, old, all brewers remember that there is more than one way to skin a cat!

Do what works for you, if your new, sometimes its easier to follow the majority, then experiment and find what works best for you.

Cheers to everyone that brews beer!
WiliECoyote

 

[HibsMax]

I Agree with amandabab here, No one will ever win this debate, and it won't matter if anyone dose a split batch test, cuz its a taste thing, some people will like the taste of one over the other and others will like the other more than the one.

But I have to say, almost everyone says, age makes your beer better, so in a way it almost makes it a contradiction in terms - using a primary fermenter only, unless your aging longer on primary. Different beers (light to heavy) make aging difference too, from what I have read.

Make good beer, Be happy!
All information is good, all opinions are good too, I read lots, take what information and or opinions I think will get me the best results and combine them to work for me, then use it, then tweak it, hopefully to perfection, this method worked Great for me in racing cars, yes I did win a lot and yes I did win championships using it, and yes what I did was way out in left field compared to what most were doing, but it worked well for me, and Im going to apply this same tactic to brewing Great beer, I hope.

I only said this to maybe help new, old, all brewers remember that there is more than one way to skin a cat!

Do what works for you, if your new, sometimes its easier to follow the majority, then experiment and find what works best for you.

Cheers to everyone that brews beer!
WiliECoyote

I agree with all of that other than the bit in bold. You're absolutely correct, it is a taste thing but if you don't start off with the same batch you have already introduced another variable. If most people like Batch #2 over Batch #1, was that because it was put in a secondary or was the second batch just "different" somehow?

You mentioned racing, something I don't claim to know anything about....therefor my analogy might be total crap. If you took two cars out for a drive around some circuit, the only apparent difference being one is on Michelin and the other is on Yokohama, would you be able to tell that car A handles better than car B based on nothing else other than the tires? Could it be possible that other factors could affect the handling? Would you prefer to try out the same tires on the same car so that all other variables are the same? I know this is not an apples to apples comparison and for all I know you CAN tell which tires are better, even if they are on totally different cars. Hopefully you get the gist of what I am trying to say. My point is that when you are trying to conduct an experiment like this you have to keep as many of the variables the same as possible so that any and all differences can be attributed to ONE thing.

 

[Mojzis]

I am new to brewing and have only used a secondary once. Most of the time I just use primary. I have been very satisfied with my results. The differences in the batches are what I enjoy. I like detecting and figuring out the subtleties. Anyway about the debate. I am a biologist and looking at the "test" performed I find it very hard that one could come to a conclusion. The test performed has too many variables. In my world I could not publish such a study because the variables have not been adequately accounted for. But, you should re-do it and like everyone said: split your batch in half. One less variable you have to worry about. Then, do this many more times and collect the data. Then I do believe you will have a great test that would be very interesting to us all.

Good luck and happy brewing!

 

[Stix]

I brew a batch and canned 1/3, bottled 1/3 and kegged the rest. I can conclude that the kegging acting as a secondary produced a beer much more pleasing and clear as a bell. I can only conclude secondarys are in fact the only way to have the best possible beer one could hope to drink.

The dang canning machine for this experiment was dam expensive to!

 

[Gamer]

And some of these comments show why I needed a Photon Accellerator. I'm not interested in making a 100% accurate scientific thesis. I'm trying to find out whether a secondary brings flavor and clarity to a home brew; moreso than a simple primary. I brewed two at the exact same time, in two different pots, using same ingredients, same lengths of time, same cooling for fermentation. Looked and tasted. That's scientific enough. And for the scientist's out there, the test was quite simple and accurrate enough to form an opinion. Nope, didnt count the H2O to see the ratio to H30 for each batch, no need to. Secondary was noticably clearer and tasted better (3 seperate people judged).

Just saying the noobs, like myself, better serve themselves to fully test all avenues. My conclusion is that the Home Brew Stores (all the ones I buy from) arent just trying to sell another carboy but are trying to help your beer with secondary conditioning.

 

[helibrewer]

Beer, like wine, ages better in bulk. I tend to reverse the argument, once the yeast have finished all of their fermentation processes and begin to go dormant, there is no need to leave the beer in primary...do SOMETHING with it; keg, bottle, or rack. Leaving it in primary just for the sake of leaving it doesn't gain anything and it ties up a fermentor.

Personally, I go from primary to keg, sometimes bottle (it's easier for me to store cold kegs than cold bottles). I've used secondaries for 1) oaking and 2) fruit additions.

For ales once I hit FG I leave it on the yeast for an additional week then chill for 2 weeks prior to packaging (cold stabilize).

For lagers once I hit 75% I ramp up the temp to 60-62 and leave it there for an additional week (DA rest and "cleanup", then rack to a keg and lager 4-8 weeks uncarbonated.

 

[WileECoyote]

I agree with all of that other than the bit in bold. You're absolutely correct, it is a taste thing but if you don't start off with the same batch you have already introduced another variable. If most people like Batch #2 over Batch #1, was that because it was put in a secondary or was the second batch just "different" somehow?

You mentioned racing, something I don't claim to know anything about....therefor my analogy might be total crap. If you took two cars out for a drive around some circuit, the only apparent difference being one is on Michelin and the other is on Yokohama, would you be able to tell that car A handles better than car B based on nothing else other than the tires? Could it be possible that other factors could affect the handling? Would you prefer to try out the same tires on the same car so that all other variables are the same? I know this is not an apples to apples comparison and for all I know you CAN tell which tires are better, even if they are on totally different cars. Hopefully you get the gist of what I am trying to say. My point is that when you are trying to conduct an experiment like this you have to keep as many of the variables the same as possible so that any and all differences can be attributed to ONE thing.

Hello, HibsMax I actually did get to do a 3 identical car, 3 different tire test once with a tire manufacture, and we testers like you thought the difference might be the cars (batches) so we the testers changed tires from car to car, I have to say it was a total waste of time, the tires made such a big difference you could not even notice the very subtle differences in each car, I believe, this relates to beer batches brewed the same way at the same time with the same ingredients.

Almost everyone on this forum states beer gets better with age, if that statement is true, then using a secondary to age your beer will make it better, plain and simple, you cant have it both ways.

This was Gamers test, he can do it any way he wants and voice his opinion here.
And if no one likes the way it was done, then YOU go do the test yourself, the way you think it should be done, then post your results, Im sure we can find flaws with anyones test no matter how it was done.

His point was, don't take one method as gospel.

Shame on you guys.

And Gamer if I misspoke on your point, Im Sorry, that was not my intension.
Gamer your point made a difference to me, Now I will be using a secondary fermenter on my beers, instead of rushing the aging process just to get it into my belly faster.

You guys have fun with this argument.

Thanks Again Gamer!
WiliECoyote

 

[HibsMax]

Hello, HibsMax I actually did get to do a 3 identical car, 3 different tire test once with a tire manufacture, and we testers like you thought the difference might be the cars (batches) so we the testers changed tires from car to car, I have to say it was a total waste of time, the tires made such a big difference you could not even notice the very subtle differences in each car, I believe, this relates to beer batches brewed the same way at the same time with the same ingredients.

Thanks for sharing that experience. At least when you tested you removed other variables by repeating your tests on the same car. I still think that a split batch is a better test, not the only test, just a better one. I'm still getting going in this hobby but your suggestion to try repeating the testing is one that I will be doing shortly. I personally don't believe that two batches of beer prepared at the same time using the same methods and ingredients will necessarily produce the same beer, especially for a noobie. The differences might be very small, I don't know personally, so rather than wonder about that I would remove all doubt and just split one batch. It's a question of how rigourous you want to be with your testing. I work in software quality assurance and I try to be as thorough as possible. I don't like ambiguity.

I'm not arguing with anyone about this but, IMHO, a split batch (including a split yeast starter) will produce results that I can put more faith in. If someone can produce the same brew time and time again then I would say there is no fault with the approach used above but I also don't think that is something that a noobie (read : ME!) will be able to achieve.

It's all good. Healthy banter and discussion is what helps us ALL learn.

 

[Gamer]

Try it out WileE. Be interested in your opinion after you do a secondary. I don't set anything in stone, so if you think it didnt help I'll try another primary. I moved mine as soon as the bubbling slowed way down... I worry about the co2 oxidation thing everyone talks about. BTW, I'm married, I dont have any feelings left to get my feelings hurt.

What we really need is some kind of legal beer exchange online. Swap couple of beers around.

 

[homebrewdad]

This past weekend, I bottled my first batch without aid of a secondary. I had allowed a full four weeks in primary, and was expecting a very clear beer ala Revvy (recipe was a partial mash adaptation of his Leffe BelgianBlonde clone).

Even though I was careful when I brought my carboy upstairs, even though I let it sit for four hours before I racked to my bottling bucket, and even though I was careful with my auto siphon... I still stirred up way more trub than I had expected, and consequently, I ended up with a decent amount of trub in my bottling bucket.

As a matter of fact, the trub (mostly hop gunk, by the looks of it) ended up gumming up my bottling wand once I completed my 43rd bottle of the batch. Multiple removals and cleanings of the tip showed me the futility of my efforts - I had enough beer to get two full cases, but the only way to get those last five bottles was going to be to let them be oxidized and full of trub... there was just too much gunk in there, and my bottling tip was useless. I setled for 43 and sadly poured the remainder.

I believe in bulk aging, but in the future, I believe that I'll use a secondary for at least a week on all of my brews. I respect the "primary only" guys - clearly, Revvy and other vets know WAAAAY more than I do - but for me, the secondary seems to work great.

Try it out WileE. Be interested in your opinion after you do a secondary. I don't set anything in stone, so if you think it didnt help I'll try another primary. I moved mine as soon as the bubbling slowed way down... I worry about the co2 oxidation thing everyone talks about. BTW, I'm married, I dont have any feelings left to get my feelings hurt.

Dude, you realize that you can leave a beer alone, and the CO2 stays put - which PROTECTS the beer from oxidation, right? Oxidation = chemical bonding of oxygen with a substance. CO2 does not equal oxygen. As stated above, i believe in secondary... but there is no need to rush and rack.

 

[Gamer]

One trick a local guy told me was to buy a paint stirring filter from lowes. Read about it on here as well. For my last mead racking, I put my auto siphon inside of the nylon filter thing (i used 5 gallon mesh) and it really really helped prevent the fruit junk from coming over to the new jug.
Lowes does carry them. I had to cut the elastic string off though.

 

[Gamer]

WileE, did you give it a shot? Interested in how it turned out.