POLL : Do you typically do a secondary fermentation?

[Craig C]

When you brew your most common, favorite beers do you do a secondary fermentation or just use primary?

 

[sfrisby]

When you brew your most common, favorite beers do you do a secondary fermentation or just use primary?

If it's getting bottled/kegged within 30 days, no sir.

 

[SoCal-Doug]

Using a secondary went out of style years ago.

 

[schematix]

Secondary is my glass.

^^^10 days and 9 hours ago this was still grain. Cloudiness due to dry hopping in primary, not yeast.

 

[Craig C]

I'm liking the responses so far. Racking to a secondary is a major PITA.

 

[z-bob]

I don't get to vote. Sometimes I do a secondary and sometimes I don't. I used to just do a single fermentor, but lately I've been starting most of my beers in a bucket so I can top-crop the yeast, and to get the beer off most of the sediment. It also makes fining with gelatin easier. I move it to a carboy after about a week.

I don't use a bottling bucket, does that count?

 

[FloppyKnockers]

Only lagers get a secondary.

 

[AkTom]

Only if I’m making my coconut ipa.

 

[shoengine]

Can't vote as neither are appropriate. I do transfer to an interim vessel for conditioning if the beer calls for it.

 

[beermanpete]

I don't secondary ales but I do for lagers.

 

[RM-MN]

I quit brewing fruit beers years ago so I never use a secondary any more.

 

[germaniumkuiper]

I am not too long in this, so I never do a secondary fermentation.

 

[ESBrewer]

The choices in the poll are kind of strict or even fundamental (I am not surprised because it seems to be such an opinionated topic) But it is no good for you to restrict your thinking and limit your choices to one method only. The situations are variable.

 

[thehaze]

I am with schematix here: secondary is my glass everyt ime. I have never did a secondary, as I never thought it would help. I made plenty of beers with adjuncts like vanilla, cooca beans, coffee, lots of dry hopping, etc. and never thought to myself, that a secondary would help.

 

[myndflyte]

Unless I'm adding something that isn't hops (oak, fruit, etc), it's all in the primary.

 

[cubalz]

Secondary? Not since early the early 90's

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

You need a third choice: I selectively do secondary fermentation. All my big beers spend time in a secondary (my 12% stout is in a keg as a secondary and will be for months....then it'll get racked to a serving keg).

 

[r4dyce]

I'd say no secondary with few exceptions

 

[Craig C]

43 replies and 88% say no secondary. I know the poll was a bit simple and their are many variables which might cause someone to use a secondary when they normally do not, but at least it tells me that a primary will suffice for most brews.

 

[FVillatoro]

Unless you are racking over fruit/other ingredients or bottling, it's just another chance to oxidize and or infect your beer.
And another vessel to clean.

 

[Hopsimus]

I only do a secondary if I'm planning on some extended aging. Mostly for big beers like Belgian Quads, or imperial stouts, and for lagers.

 

[MaxStout]

Did it for a big RIS I aged for 5 months, but that's the only reason I'll use a secondary for beer. I've used them for a few wines, to get it off the lees.

I get why many brew stores recommend using a secondary all the time. 1. Tell new brewers they need to use a secondary. 2. Sell them another carboy. 3. Profit.

 

[pshankstar]

There are only in a few cases where I use a secondary.

• When I am adding fruit, so I will rack off the yeast cake and rack onto the fruit.
• Aging big beers, like an American Barleywine on some oak chips.
• When I am adding any other strange ingredients.

Otherwise, its just the one vessel and into the keg.

 

[homebrewer_99]

In many cases, kegs are a secondary...

 

[mr_stout]

I quit brewing fruit beers years ago so I never use a secondary any more.

I agree. Only use a secondary if you are fermenting something that needs to be removed after a week or so, like fruit or some sort of spice.

 

[mr_stout]

I cannot do a secondary ferment because all my buckets and carboys are filled with beer.

 

[PADave]

I have never have done a secondary.

 

[dmtaylor]

I didn't secondary in past, but now I do. I've been bottling all my beer for the past 19 years and probably always will. For years I said "I don't mind a little haze in my beer". I've recently changed that tune. I want my beers as bright as the sun. I started doing secondaries again about a year ago and I'm happier with my results.

 

[PrrCabin]

This is a really great read!
Tx to everyone who stepped up to the plate and replied to the OP

I always do a secondary but now I don't so anymore

Cabin

 

[John Eberly]

Almost always rack into carboys for a secondary fermentation. My primary fermenter is a 40 gallon cone and it is too big to cold crash in the fridge.

I like to get the beer off the lees when I do large batches as I think it clears and ages better, I often have kegs around for a year or longer.

Even “quick and dirty” beers like a hefe are less muddy with a secondary imho.

As far as this process being “ out of fashion”, how many arcane methods are you guys using just to make “authentic” beers from long ago? I know that bright, non- sour beer might seem quaint with all of the latest fads but that was the goal when I started brewing way back in 1995. So I will keep using this antique approach.

 

[divrack]

For the same reason I don't switch beds halfway through the night I don't secondary.
Unless putting it in a keg after a week or so counts. I do that to avoid risk of infection as I have crappy buckets

 

[wimpy]

When you brew your most common, favorite beers do you do a secondary fermentation or just use primary?

 

[divrack]

say no more

 

[divrack]

Almost always rack into carboys for a secondary fermentation. My primary fermenter is a 40 gallon cone and it is too big to cold crash in the fridge.

I like to get the beer off the lees when I do large batches as I think it clears and ages better, I often have kegs around for a year or longer.

Even “quick and dirty” beers like a hefe are less muddy with a secondary imho.

As far as this process being “ out of fashion”, how many arcane methods are you guys using just to make “authentic” beers from long ago? I know that bright, non- sour beer might seem quaint with all of the latest fads but that was the goal when I started brewing way back in 1995. So I will keep using this antique approach.

i think thats totally fine and makes sense. but i think its worth differentiating that proscess from someone new to brewing thats going to hammer their beer probably before its even finished, unnecessarily siphoning it off into some other plastic bucket, and then a couple weeks later into another bucket to bottle. just introducing o2 and bugs for no real reason. anything thats likely to sit around for a long while yea get it off the gunk, but otherwise its totally a waste of time. ive never had a problem getting clear beer from a single fermentation dumbed in a corn after a couple weeks and chilled. not that i aim for clarity in many aspects of my life.

 

[shoengine]

For the same reason I don't switch beds halfway through the night I don't secondary.
Unless putting it in a keg after a week or so counts. I do that to avoid risk of infection as I have crappy buckets

I would switch beds if I was laying in a pile of crap.

 

[deadwolfbones]

I use a secondary with fruit additions only.

 

[divrack]

I would switch beds if I was laying in a pile of crap.

Well that depends on how you define crap. Seems a bit weird to be worried about the very things that make your beer. Obviously it is time dependent and arbitrary somewhat where that line is. To continue the metaphor, I do change the sheets now and again, but I'm pretty relaxed about not doing it every day. On the other hand id consider it if I were entertaining a high maintenance lager like lady...

 

[shoengine]

Let's torture this analogy some more. I guess if you wanted to age with some fruit, you could pour it over yourself while laying in your detritus, however it seems cleaner to do that in clean sheets.

Seriously though, I do not buy at all the fear-mongering that gets tossed around anytime secondaries come up about introducing "bugs". First, primary fermentation is by far the easiest place to introduce "bugs" as there is not yet a yeast foothold, and there is no alcohol, leaving hops apparently as your only defense against the Dark Arts. Essentially, if you are capable of preparing a primary, you are more than capable of preparing a secondary, where there is either an active yeast fermentation or a plethera of alcohol protecting from minor infections.

Additionally there is always a second vessel, with the same risk of infection, no matter whether it is an intermediate device such as a keg, carboy, bucket or cask, or if it is a serving device, such as a keg, cask, brite tank or bottle. You can however get into all these arguments over O2, which I won't because they always devolve, but there is nothing intrinsicly wrong with a intermediate, second fermenting/condition vessel.

They are just very rarely needed.

 

[kh54s10]

As others have pointed out you only give yes or no. For me it is almost never. But with additions - sometimes, and with lagers sometimes. Out of 99 batches I have done a secondary 3 times - I think.

 

[waldoar15]

When you brew your most common, favorite beers do you do a secondary fermentation or just use primary?

I mostly brew lagers, so they get a long primary and then lager in kegs @32* for at least a month. I really do the same thing with the few ales that I brew though.