Noon question

[tag0304]

Greetings all. My dad years ago (20+) got into brewing and I helped him a few times. He hasn't done it in years and I just picked up equipment to start doing it myself. Lots changes in some areas. Few questions before I start my first batch.

Picked up a BB kit " American Light" I myself enjoy all different types of beer and plan on trying others out but first time wanted something simple that I knew friends and family would like. When my dad used to so it it was ice baths for cooling. I picked up a wort chiller as the store clerk said "you don't need it, but you will like it". My father always did everything in a primary but I plan on transferring to secondary. The yeast with the kit is Nottingham. I see nothing specific on ferment temperature in the instructions or packet. These will be kept in a dark basement room that currently hovers around 63-67 degrees. Will this be OK? Does temp really only become a problem if it gets to hot? And just slower with cold?

Love the forums and can't wait to get brewing.

 

[tag0304]

Noob question. Darn autocorrect.

 

[kombat]

My father always did everything in a primary but I plan on transferring to secondary.

Your father was ahead of his time. Modern prevailing practice is to only use secondary in specific cases, such as when you're adding ingredients to the beer post-fermentation (fruit, wood, dry hops). Don't transfer to secondary "just because" - have a good reason for disturbing the beer and risking oxidizing/infecting it.

The yeast with the kit is Nottingham. I see nothing specific on ferment temperature in the instructions or packet. These will be kept in a dark basement room that currently hovers around 63-67 degrees. Will this be OK?

That's a little warm. Nottingham in particular likes it cooler. I like to ferment Nottingham in the 59° - 62° F range. Keep in mind that that's beer temperature, not room temperature. Fermentation produces its own heat, so the beer itself can be up to 10° warmer than the surrounding air.

Does temp really only become a problem if it gets to hot?

Too hot is more of a problem than too cold. Too cold will just slow the yeast down, stressing it, producing some off-flavours, and risking a stalled fermentation. Too hot produces much worse off-flavours in my opinion (particularly fusels), not to mention an overly-vigorous fermentation which can blow out your airlock and make a mess.

Temperature is one of the two most important factors in producing good beer (sanitization is the other). Controlling your temperature will make an enormous difference in the resulting beer. A difference of 10 degrees is the difference between a tasty, refreshing beer, and banana-flavoured nail polish remover.

 

[rodwha]

My friend ferments on the concrete floor in his basement in Texas, and he feels it keeps his temps within reason. I wouldn't be willing to try this, but he said it works for him. Maybe due to the chill in the concrete vs air?

Initially I used large plastic storage bins with water that I rotated froze water bottles in to keep the temp in the mid 60's (beer temp). Maybe just a storage bin with water on the basement floor would be enough to keep the water cool enough.

I quit doing it this way as about half of a large freezer was occupied with water bottles, and I was a slave to fermentation times as I'd need to swap bottles every 8-10 hrs or so. Now I have a fermentation chamber and can live life! My only concern is a power outage...

 

[tag0304]

I did manage to find a bit more on the yeast at Danstar's website and they mention 57° to 70°F as range for ferment. I had not thought about the increase in temp with fermenting. I think on the floor would get me down to what your recommending with the increase in ferment temp but I will be prepared to adjust once everything is going.

Im finding brewing is a lot like other things, everyone has their preference, and some are widely different then the other. When I was recently talking with my dad about me getting into it, he now is considering starting up again as well. I was telling him about the whole kegging thing that is popular now and wasnt when he was doing it and he really liked that idea of skipping bottling and right to a keg, along with all the new no-rinse sanitation products out now.

He also asked what the need for a secondary was for as he never used one. He even joked that while he had 2 carboys if he second fermented he wouldnt be able to make 10 gallons at a time. Seems most I have read and again Im sure its a preference thing but a lighter beer will benefit from a transfer. I know the Brewers Best kit recommends doing it but Im finding out those instructions are not the best to go by from reading the forums. They say pitch yeast dry on the wort, but most here recommend rehydrating. But I also have read enough to understand why the kit doesnt mention rehydrating (more risk of contamination for us noobs).

I vaguely remember tasting some batches he made way back then. And they always tasted good. This was with no fancy no rinse sanitizing products, no secondary, only a 2.5 gallon boil (I will be doing a full boil which Im told is more beneficial) . I should be starting it this weekend and Im already wanting to start another batch and looking at some recipes.

 

[kombat]

I did manage to find a bit more on the yeast at Danstar's website and they mention 57° to 70°F as range for ferment.

Right. The yeast will happily ferment (quite furiously, actually) at 70° F. That's not the problem. The problem is what flavours they'll throw off if you allow them to work that warm.

Trust me, the ideal temperature range for Nottingham is 60-65° for a nice, clean flavour profile.

I think on the floor would get me down to what your recommending with the increase in ferment temp but I will be prepared to adjust once everything is going.

That's all I was suggesting. Pay attention, and adjust as necessary. Those first 3-5 days are crucial. After that, it's fine to let the beer warm up to ambient temperatures.

He also asked what the need for a secondary was for as he never used one.

There are a few times when racking to a secondary vessel is appropriate.

• You only have 1 primary fermenter and want to brew another batch. So you move your beer to a 5-gallon "secondary" vessel/carboy to free up your larger, 6.5-gallon fermenter for the new batch.
• You're brewing another batch and wish to re-use the yeast from a previous batch. So you rack it to a smaller (5-gallon) carboy to get at the yeast cake at the bottom so you can re-use it.
• You're adding post-fermentation ingredients (dry hops, fruit, wood chips) to your beer, but you plan to re-use the yeast and don't want to contaminate it with the ingredients. So you rack the beer away from the yeast before adding the post-fermentation ingredients.
• You're adding post-fermentation ingredients and are worried they'll sink into the yeast cake and fail to infuse their full flavour potential into the beer.

That's all I can think of. There used to be a belief that racking beer to a secondary vessel aided in clarifying the beer, but I've never seen any science to support that claim. To the contrary, logic would dictate that given the same length of time, a beer that was left undisturbed for the entire period will clear better than beer that was disturbed partway through. The presence of a yeast cake at the bottom of the fermenter does not discourage additional sediment from precipitating out of suspension.

Seems most I have read and again Im sure its a preference thing but a lighter beer will benefit from a transfer.

How? What potential benefit do you think there would be?

I know the Brewers Best kit recommends doing it but Im finding out those instructions are not the best to go by from reading the forums.

You're quick learner.

I vaguely remember tasting some batches he made way back then. And they always tasted good. This was with no fancy no rinse sanitizing products, no secondary,

Again, where are you getting the notion that racking the beer to a secondary vessel will result in better-tasting beer?

 

[flars]

Wasn't mentioned, but add a stick on thermometer strip to your fermentor to track the actual wort temperature. They are very accurate.
You may find it necessary to use a swamp cooler to keep the wort temperature under control. Place the thermometer strip towards the upper level of the wort. The strips do not function under water.

 

[tag0304]

Again, where are you getting the notion that racking the beer to a secondary vessel will result in better-tasting beer?

That seems to be a fairly common question. A simple search on these forums shows that its a heated topic that comes up often with no clear winner. For every person that says not to that no proof to benefits, others say they always do and notice a difference in taste, color, cloudiness. The company that makes the kit recommends it, so are they right? Other things they say people say not to do so who is the correct one? The local Brew store I purchased the kit from has been around awhile, he recommended it but did say its not required.

I think this is one of things about getting into brewing I like. If everything was so clear cut it would be simply follow the written instructions and no need for any public forum to discuss techniques. Rather dull I have already changed my strategy thanks to this post. And part of me after reading more is wondering if I really should bother/risk a transfer. But another part of me is excited to start a second batch quickly so as you pointed out that may be another reason I do a secondary. With the local brew store 5 minutes away from work though maybe I should just stop by and pick up another 6.5 gallon to accommodate that. This is going to get addicting and pricey isn't it.

Thats another whole debate/discussion with no clear winner. I got the boxed kit with a 6.5 bucket & lid, bottle bucket and 5 gallon glass carboy. I was unsure on the bucket, those lids dont seem secure. But searching here I have found many saying its fine, the positive pressure from fermenting is enough to prevent anything nasty from getting under that lid. But if I am going to just keep it in primary and no secondary would a carboy be a better option or no big difference? And should I purchase another 6.5 gallon container to do 2 batches whats your preference. I like the glass carboy but have read some negative things about them (heavy, slippery when wet, breakage issues). Those plastic Better Bottles seem like a good alternative.

 

[kombat]

That seems to be a fairly common question. A simple search on these forums shows that its a heated topic that comes up often with no clear winner.

Those who continue to advocate for secondary do so merely out of habit, rather than any solid scientific evidence. Not that there's anything wrong with that - it's just that the old reasons for doing so (clarity, yeast autolysis) have been shown to be invalid.

The company that makes the kit recommends it, so are they right?

No.

The local Brew store I purchased the kit from has been around awhile, he recommended it but did say its not required.

How often/recently does that person actually brew?

I think this is one of things about getting into brewing I like. If everything was so clear cut it would be simply follow the written instructions and no need for any public forum to discuss techniques. Rather dull

There are, of course lots of topics where a friendly, subjective disagreement is unavoidable. Particularly regarding things like flavour. Not everyone likes the same things, and that's wonderful.

But other things (optimal mash/fermentation temperature, pH values, etc.), the science is conclusive and undeniable. Someone may "like" to ferment a little hotter, and they may even prefer the resulting beer, but that beer will have undeniably higher fusel alcohols. Whether or not you agree that that's a "flaw" is subjective, but the fact that they will exist is not really up for debate.

With the local brew store 5 minutes away from work though maybe I should just stop by and pick up another 6.5 gallon to accommodate that.

No, save your money! Do a quick search for "carboy" or "home brewing" on Kijiji or Craigslist - you'll find tons of people selling used carboys of various sizes.

I was unsure on the bucket, those lids dont seem secure.

Now you're getting into an area with a little more subjectivity: Fermenters. Lots of people make great beer with the plastic buckets. However, they are more oxygen-permeable than glass, so they're not recommended for storing beer for more than a couple of weeks, or you risk oxidization setting in. Plus, you can't see what's going on inside without lifting the lid (and letting in air). Thus, glass is the superior container.

Or is it? Glass is fragile, and there are multiple threads on this forum documenting (quite graphically) the crippling injuries you can sustain when a glass carboy breaks. Thus, the BetterBottle was created.

A clear plastic carboy that lets you see what's going on inside. But now we're back to the oxidization problem.

The king of the fermenter hill is a stainless steel conical fermenter. But then you can't see what's going on inside, and they're vastly more expensive. And harder to clean.

See? Now THAT is a subjective topic.

I personally do all my fermenting in 6.5 gallon glass carboys I bought off Kijiji. I use a BrewHauler strap to move them around, and always wear leather work gloves when I have to handle them directly (such as during cleaning). I'm exceedingly careful never to let them "bang" into each other, and never set them directly on a hard surface (concrete, tile). I've only broken one so far, but that was my fault (it tipped over while racking into it), and I've never been injured by them. That said, if money were no object, I'd buy stainless conicals in a heartbeat.

 

[tag0304]

How often/recently does that person actually brew?

I know him as well as I know anyone posting in this post, not well.

As for the secondary and scientific data. Purely playing devils advocate as you seem to know what your talking about. But if there is as you say no scientific data to back up its worth doing, doesnt that also mean there is no scientific data stating the opposite? Because if there was, then that would count as scientific data against the other either way.

 

[kombat]

if there is as you say no scientific data to back up its worth doing, doesnt that also mean there is no scientific data stating the opposite?

Great question. There is indeed scientific evidence debunking at least one of the traditional reasons for transferring off the yeast ASAP: autolysis. The big brewers rack to a secondary vessel, away from the yeast, because in large tanks, the hydrostatic pressure on the yeast at the bottom (where yeast tend to hang out once they've gorged on sugar) crushes the cells, causing autolysis, and the associated off-flavours. The pressures required to "crush" those cells do not exist on the homebrew scale, because we simply aren't fermenting nearly as large volumes of beer.

Regarding how racking to secondary affects clarity, simple logic dictates that leaving the beer alone will result in clearer beer. However, I believe there was an episode of a podcast out there somewhere (I haven't heard it myself) where they did an experiment with two batches of beer (one left in primary, one racked to secondary), and supposedly they believed the one racked to secondary was clearer. Now, I have no idea if this was truly a scientifically-controlled test, and all other factors were held the same, and how the beer was treated, and how they measured the resulting clarity, and it's purely anecdotal, but this is really the lone data point that is referred to in defense of the notion that the use of a secondary vessel results in clearer beer. I remain unconvinced, as it defies logic, and seems very subjective and potentially flawed to me, but I'm unaware of any truly scientific analyses of the issue.