Quick Lager Method *UPDATED*
- Thread starter Brulosopher
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Depending on what is meant by 50% attenuation, both versions can be correct I think.
If using a yeast that is going to attenuate 80% for a given brew
eg OG 1.060 FG 1.010
50% attenuation could be defined as 50 on the way to 80 in which case it is 5/8 of the way to FG. i.e. 1.029
Or 50% may mean 50% done i.e.: 1.035
I take it to mean 50% attenuation on its way to 80% max (The first definition). That way it is the same for every brew and yeast type regardless of projected anticipated FG. This definition is independent of the projected attenuation.
If using a yeast that is going to attenuate 80% for a given brew
eg OG 1.060 FG 1.010
50% attenuation could be defined as 50 on the way to 80 in which case it is 5/8 of the way to FG. i.e. 1.029
Or 50% may mean 50% done i.e.: 1.035
I take it to mean 50% attenuation on its way to 80% max (The first definition). That way it is the same for every brew and yeast type regardless of projected anticipated FG. This definition is independent of the projected attenuation.
Last edited:
Raisoshi
Well-Known Member
Oh now that makes sense. I was indeed a bit confused by that reply.
Geez, you guys are way too hung up on the exact nature of 50%!
@denny
I suppose it is a bit pointless to log on to HBT in the hope of trying to learn new things. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll be sure to bear that in mind the next time I don't understand something entirely or realize others have a slightly differing take on it. What was I thinking?!
I suppose it is a bit pointless to log on to HBT in the hope of trying to learn new things. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll be sure to bear that in mind the next time I don't understand something entirely or realize others have a slightly differing take on it. What was I thinking?!
ZebulonBrewer
Well-Known Member
I think what he's saying is that those 7 gravity points aren't a big deal in terms of fermentation time. With the timings involved, it's maybe a day? Unless you're on a big time crunch, who cares about the one day. Plus, all things considered, you should avoid opening your bucket/carboy as much as possible.
Raisoshi
Well-Known Member
Well, some people are more relaxed, some like to stick to a precise method, I'm the latter
You may be right, but I just "feel" better following specifics.
I hope you learned that it's something you don't need to obsess about. That was my point.
I did learn something from the thread, that's for sure.
SpeedYellow
Well-Known Member
The time savings here boils down to just two differences from how we've all been taught to make lagers:
(1) Ramp up for the diacetyl rest once you've hit 50% attenuation instead of 80%; and
(2) Don't bother to lager for 4-8 weeks; just give it a week.
Certainly item #1 would save a couple days, perhaps without hurting the beer. But #2 is a big fail. Lagering cannot just be skipped -- they virtually always improve dramatically in the first month. A suggestion to skip it is quite concerning, to put it politely.
(1) Ramp up for the diacetyl rest once you've hit 50% attenuation instead of 80%; and
(2) Don't bother to lager for 4-8 weeks; just give it a week.
Certainly item #1 would save a couple days, perhaps without hurting the beer. But #2 is a big fail. Lagering cannot just be skipped -- they virtually always improve dramatically in the first month. A suggestion to skip it is quite concerning, to put it politely.
You should try it before offering your wisdom. In my experience doing it both ways, the methods described in this thread will get you 97% of the way there in 3 weeks. There is marginal improvement after another 4-6 weeks of lagering, but it is no way dramatic.
azazel1024
Well-Known Member
I am just starting to experiment with it. My first lager was ice bathed and then 4 weeks in the fermentation chamber at 40F (Dopplebock) and it was pretty good. It didn't use the fermentation chamber, because I built a temp controller and converted a mini-fridge after fermentation was complete.
Then I did a German Pilsner where it sat at 50F for 10 days and then at 62F to finish attenuating and then 40F for 4 weeks.
I just did an English Pale Lager (kind of a Vienna, with English hops) and a Schwarzbier together in the fermentation chamber. 5 days at 48F, 3 days at 50F and then turned it off and opened it up to sit at 64F for 3 days before I dropped them to 38F over the course of 3 days (Dropped about 4F in the morning and then when I got home from work each day till I hit 38F). Including the ramp down, 2 weeks and I bottled then back to back.
They are frankly awesome. Clean, clear, great beers. All told it was about 24 days +/- 2 days (because I don't remember exact dates I brewed both beers on or exact day I bottled). I think it is probably what I am going to follow for all lagers in the future, though I might try going with an extra week lagering for the big lagers, like Dopplebocks, Baltic Lagers and DIPLs.
Then I did a German Pilsner where it sat at 50F for 10 days and then at 62F to finish attenuating and then 40F for 4 weeks.
I just did an English Pale Lager (kind of a Vienna, with English hops) and a Schwarzbier together in the fermentation chamber. 5 days at 48F, 3 days at 50F and then turned it off and opened it up to sit at 64F for 3 days before I dropped them to 38F over the course of 3 days (Dropped about 4F in the morning and then when I got home from work each day till I hit 38F). Including the ramp down, 2 weeks and I bottled then back to back.
They are frankly awesome. Clean, clear, great beers. All told it was about 24 days +/- 2 days (because I don't remember exact dates I brewed both beers on or exact day I bottled). I think it is probably what I am going to follow for all lagers in the future, though I might try going with an extra week lagering for the big lagers, like Dopplebocks, Baltic Lagers and DIPLs.
SpeedYellow
Well-Known Member
Well obviously I have tried drinking unlagered lagers, and dozens of times. It doesn't end well. The only difference between my and this method is that I wait until 80-90% attenuated, instead of 50%, before ramping up to the d-rest. Is the claim here that ramping up sooner to the d-rest somehow eliminates the need for lagering? That seems an unlikely cause-and-effect, but if that's what folks are claiming, I'll definitely give it a shot.
kombat
Well-Known Member
I've tried rushing my d-rest before and always ended up with a green-apple bomb. I've found that being patient and holding that temperature right at 10.5° C (51° F) for a full 2 weeks, then warming it up to room temperature for another week, give me the best, cleanest possible flavour in my lagers. After the 3 weeks are up (2 @ 51° F, 1 at room temp, around 65° F), it gets racked to a keg, purged, and put in the fridge (34° F) on CO2. 2 weeks later, it's carbed and drinkable. A month later, it's crystal clear and delicious.
Based on my personal results, I've have to disagree. I've judged a BOS lager that was never lagered at all! Could you tell us about your results when you tried this method?
Hey dude, thanks for the info!
I read the original article you posted on your blog and started a thread a while back asking if anyone had success doing it. Fast forward to me getting to cater a wedding with exclusively my homebrew. By far, the most popular beer I had was my honeyed "Winnie the Pale Ale" which I used your method with a cream ale hybrid yeast. So I will attest that the technique works
I read the original article you posted on your blog and started a thread a while back asking if anyone had success doing it. Fast forward to me getting to cater a wedding with exclusively my homebrew. By far, the most popular beer I had was my honeyed "Winnie the Pale Ale" which I used your method with a cream ale hybrid yeast. So I will attest that the technique works
This method works. The majority of my homebrews are lagers. What I do for my beers with an OG of 1.042-1.058 is simple.
1. Chill wort to 48 degrees and pitch a good healthy starter. Immediately set fermenter to 52 degrees.
2. 5 days after pitching raise temperature to 55 degrees for 24 hours. Next day raise temperature to 58 degrees. Usually by this time the krausen is starting to fall and you can see fermentation slowing down. 12 hours later, raise temperature to 62 degrees and then 12 hour after that raise temperature to 65 degrees where it will sit for 72 hours. By the time the temperature hits 62 degrees, the Krausen is gone.
3. After 72 hour diacetyl rest at 65 degrees, take a FG reading and do a microwave diacetyl test (separate hydrometer sample into two glasses. heat one glass to 150 degrees and leave the other untouched, the let them cool to room temperature and taste. Other than a reduction in carbonation both samples should taste the same which tells me diacetyl rest is complete).
4. If sample is at my target FG and passes diacetyl test, crash cool to 33 degrees and Keg. Then force carbonate and store at 38 degrees into my kegerator until the keg this brew is replacing kicks.
I've produced nothing but good delicious clean lagers using this method and highly recommend it.
1. Chill wort to 48 degrees and pitch a good healthy starter. Immediately set fermenter to 52 degrees.
2. 5 days after pitching raise temperature to 55 degrees for 24 hours. Next day raise temperature to 58 degrees. Usually by this time the krausen is starting to fall and you can see fermentation slowing down. 12 hours later, raise temperature to 62 degrees and then 12 hour after that raise temperature to 65 degrees where it will sit for 72 hours. By the time the temperature hits 62 degrees, the Krausen is gone.
3. After 72 hour diacetyl rest at 65 degrees, take a FG reading and do a microwave diacetyl test (separate hydrometer sample into two glasses. heat one glass to 150 degrees and leave the other untouched, the let them cool to room temperature and taste. Other than a reduction in carbonation both samples should taste the same which tells me diacetyl rest is complete).
4. If sample is at my target FG and passes diacetyl test, crash cool to 33 degrees and Keg. Then force carbonate and store at 38 degrees into my kegerator until the keg this brew is replacing kicks.
I've produced nothing but good delicious clean lagers using this method and highly recommend it.
Holy S$&%snacks, I NEED one of those. I already have a chest freezer for temp control, but I don;t like the idea of tying it up for weeks with a lager and not being able to use it for my ales. Please let me know if that thing is worth the money
This thread made me so happy. Yesterday around noon, the power at my house went out. In my garage, my lone power outlet in the wall is GFCI, so when the power kicked backed on, my fermentation refrigerator did not. My lager (using Wyeast 2206) was fermenting happily at 50F, but when I got home from work it had raised to 56F. Turns out I was 5 days in and at 1.026 when I got home (OG 1.055). Unintentionally, I guess I'm using this method. Went ahead and cooled to to 54-55F and will bump it up over the next couple of days. This is my first lager so can't wait to taste the results. I still might not tap it until September, but who can honestly stay out of their keg that long?
OP
OP
Brulosopher
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,007
- Reaction score
- 447
The temp swings have been purported by some to be a cause of off flavors. My guess is your beer will be fine. Cheers!
Woo!
I tried this method for the first time about a month ago. it was a total disaster. why? I use better bottles and the extreme cold crashing caused the volume to contract and crush in the sides of my better bottle like a smashed beer can. luckily it did not crack, but to get it to pop back out I had to pull out the stopper which violently decompressed everything. I couldn't have shook it up more if I hit it with my car. lesson learned, next time I transfer to a keg before lagering.
OP
OP
Brulosopher
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,007
- Reaction score
- 447
SpeedYellow
Well-Known Member
Ok, I just tried this idea of ramping up to the d-rest at 50% attenuation, and got the entirely predictable result of high diacetyl. As we all know, diacetyl is increased at higher fermentation temps. And this can be a real problem since diacetyl often won't show up until a couple weeks after kegging or bottling (which happened here). I've used this W-34/70 yeast several times and never had any diacetyl until trying this.
So IMHO, fermenting (half) warm isn't worth the risk. And let's remember this routine doesn't show up on that graphic of typical routines cited by braukaiser :
As I've learned time & time again, cutting corners on a lager is a fool's errand. But for those who choose to ramp up at 50% attenuation, make sure to conduct a diacetyl test before cold crashing.
I'm a bit suspicious about curves that show sugar (extract) concentration jumping back up as fermentation progresses.Ok, I just tried this idea of ramping up to the d-rest at 50% attenuation, and got the entirely predictable result of high diacetyl. As we all know, diacetyl is increased at higher fermentation temps. And this can be a real problem since diacetyl often won't show up until a couple weeks after kegging or bottling (which happened here). I've used this W-34/70 yeast several times and never had any diacetyl until trying this.
So IMHO, fermenting (half) warm isn't worth the risk. And let's remember this routine doesn't show up on that graphic of typical routines cited by braukaiser :
As I've learned time & time again, cutting corners on a lager is a fool's errand. But for those who choose to ramp up at 50% attenuation, make sure to conduct a diacetyl test before cold crashing.
Does anyone have access to the source material from which Kai pulled these graphs (I suspect it is in German.) I'd like to know if they are based on actual measurements, or are calculated or conceptual curves.Edit: There are a number of other inconsistencies in the charts if you study them closely. Even if you take them at face value, if we compare Chart F (closest to Brulosopher's profile) with Chart A, diacetyl is lower sooner than with the profile of chart A.
Brew on
Last edited:
wobdee
Junior Member
I recently listened to a couple pro brewers on a couple AHA conference seminars about brewing lagers and they recommended D rests but only raising the temp a few degrees toward the end of fermentation. I guess it makes sense if you still have active fermentation why raise it up to Ale temps and risk fruity flavors? It seems that most here are ramping up to the mid 60's. I do mine at 60 for 3-4 days and haven't had any issues yet but I may reduce that a few degrees.
@doug293cz
I believe the blips in extract content in the graphs from Kai's site relate to the addition of new wort via kreusening.
The graphs are from technical university of Vienna.
I believe the blips in extract content in the graphs from Kai's site relate to the addition of new wort via kreusening.
The graphs are from technical university of Vienna.
I understand your hesitation, I was extremely hesitant at first too, but I can say that my helles came out with no diacetyl. I think the important step is to start really low (~45 at pitching), then raise to desired temperature once fermentation starts. The only complaints about my helles I have are that I probably should have decocted more of the mash, and maybe done the initial fermentation a bit warmer (WLP860 at 48 came out a little too clean, the helles I made last year with WLP860 at 50 came out better).
I don't think it is so much about cutting corners. I have read interviews with professional brewers where they say something like "well lagers take about 3-4 weeks compared to ales in 2-3". Following the traditional method that I have used in the past, a helles would take me ~7 weeks (~7 days primary, ~7 days dropping the temperature slowly, then 5 weeks of cold conditioning). There is tons that homebrewers don't know that professional brewers do, this might be one of those things. Kai's diagram might be old, and might be from a source that didn't know. There are very few single sources of information in brewing because it's a business and no one wants to give away too many secrets (even brewing colleges like Weihenstephan).
Having the right sized pitch, aerating, and good temperature control are still going to be important. I would never suggest this method to someone who pitches a single vial at 60 and then drops the temperature.
When did you try the sample? How long did you let it rest at the elevated temperature? The diacetyl should be reduced at the elevated temperature once the yeast finishes. This method is really just an early diacetyl rest.
That could explain them, but why would you krausen at that point in the process (I thought it was for carbonating, but I'm no expert in krausening)? And why would only two cases be krausened?
Edit: There is a link to the TU Vienna source paper on Kai site, but it is a dead link.
Brew on
Each graph is explained in detail on his site. On my phone so I don't have the link. My thumbs are too fat to get it in my reply.
Kai does mention krausening for Chart D, but not for F. Given why he says it's beneficial in case D (to help with diacetyl removal at cooler ferm temps), it doesn't really make sense that it would be used in case F.
Brew on
SpeedYellow
Well-Known Member
Understood, and that's why I referred to it only as "risky," not "doomed to fail with 100% certainty."
Clearly my d-rest wasn't long enough. Usually a 3-4 day hold at 64f after fermentation ends is enough, but not this time (likely due to the greater diacetyl production at higher temps).
You call it "early d-rest," while I call it "fermenting hot".
As long as you sample your beer before cooling it shouldn't be risky. Like you say, you likely get an increased diacetyl production in the initial fermentation, but that's why the method calls for 5-7 days instead of the usual 2-4. I actually was able to make a helles that got 3rd place in competition without a diacetyl rest at all, just by fermenting with the correct pitch rate and keeping it cold at all times.
It seems like this method will help do a lot of the cleaning that the yeast does during lagering, but at the same time produce more diacetyl, which is why you need the longer rest afterwards. I actually overshot the OG on the export I made by 6 points (1.066, shooting for 1.060, different supplier who apparently does a better job milling than my LHBS). It's crashing right now but the sample had no diacetyl after 6 days at 65.
Again, I was extremely hesitant at first, I love a good clean lager (but not boring clean). I had some issues crashing it (my fridge went too low and partially froze the beer), but once I got the trub out, beautifully clean and clear (beforehand it was a good kellerbier). I am wondering if maybe my lack of character might come from this method, but I think it was because I fermented cooler at first.
Those are fighting words sir, guns at dawn in the town square.You call it "early d-rest," while I call it "fermenting hot".
SpeedYellow
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's quite as simple as tasting the beer for diacetyl before cooling it. As White Labs explains (link) : "Even though the diacetyl can't be tasted, however, the beer may contain high levels of the precursor, acetolactate, which can be converted to diacetyl." So a proper diacetyl test is needed. I almost never have diacetyl problems, so I don't bother. Wish I had done it here though.
And just to clarify, my d-rest time was plenty. The beer was at 64F for like 10-12 days, with a 3-4 day hold AFTER ferm was complete.
And p.s. the yeast was plenty healthy too: (1) I used 2 packs of dry yeast, which is pretty reliable, and (2) I measured CO2 output at least daily and this was possibly the healthiest fermentation I've ever had with this recipe.
Hi guys,
I'm Brad and I was reading through this thread and got really interested by the amount of talk about "Diacetyl rest." I agree that the concept has been well validated (just do a brief google scholar search) but there seems to be some misinformation out there about the rest.
First yes the "diacetyl rest" does exist but I think that many blow it way out of proportion possibly due to not fully understanding what is going on.
Second, depending on the yeasts strain, the higher the pitch rate the higher the production of diacetyl. In addition, the quicker the fermentation the more diacetyl is produced. I say depending because there is a study that shows a lager yeasts that had massive numbers of pitched yeasts that fermented for 14 days had lower diactyl than one that had lower pitched rates...so maybe pitch number/rate is more important than time.
Third, its well known from many studies that due to the mallard reaction that beer sitting in kegs and bottles produce more diacetyl over time. Especially those that are not filtered which have yeasts still present.
Fourth, the amount of certain amino acids (I've seen valine cited the most) in varying malts will alter the amount of diacetyl produced.
And so on.... so basically diacetyl production is multi-factorial, but should we care? Well, yes since it alters taste. However, diacetyl is quickly removed from from wort once fermenation nears an end and the temp is increased. The diacetyl is quickly (think hours) taken back up into the yeasts cells and disposed of through several cellular reduction pathways.
Basically,
Increased fermentation temps lead to higher initial α-acetolactate production by yeast, which then undergoes spontaneous decarboxylation of this acid to diacetyl which leads to a (buttery or unwatned) flavor in beer. The increased rate of diacetyl production is a direct consequence of increased yeasts growth, but due to the growth there is an exponentially higher number or mass of yeasts organisms to remove diacetyl by yeast via the action of various reductase enzymes. This reaction takes hours to complete and is affected by factors such as cell membrane composition that can be strain dependent or altered via amino acids present in the grains, temperature and pH.
Hope this helps.
Brad
I'm Brad and I was reading through this thread and got really interested by the amount of talk about "Diacetyl rest." I agree that the concept has been well validated (just do a brief google scholar search) but there seems to be some misinformation out there about the rest.
First yes the "diacetyl rest" does exist but I think that many blow it way out of proportion possibly due to not fully understanding what is going on.
Second, depending on the yeasts strain, the higher the pitch rate the higher the production of diacetyl. In addition, the quicker the fermentation the more diacetyl is produced. I say depending because there is a study that shows a lager yeasts that had massive numbers of pitched yeasts that fermented for 14 days had lower diactyl than one that had lower pitched rates...so maybe pitch number/rate is more important than time.
Third, its well known from many studies that due to the mallard reaction that beer sitting in kegs and bottles produce more diacetyl over time. Especially those that are not filtered which have yeasts still present.
Fourth, the amount of certain amino acids (I've seen valine cited the most) in varying malts will alter the amount of diacetyl produced.
And so on.... so basically diacetyl production is multi-factorial, but should we care? Well, yes since it alters taste. However, diacetyl is quickly removed from from wort once fermenation nears an end and the temp is increased. The diacetyl is quickly (think hours) taken back up into the yeasts cells and disposed of through several cellular reduction pathways.
Basically,
Increased fermentation temps lead to higher initial α-acetolactate production by yeast, which then undergoes spontaneous decarboxylation of this acid to diacetyl which leads to a (buttery or unwatned) flavor in beer. The increased rate of diacetyl production is a direct consequence of increased yeasts growth, but due to the growth there is an exponentially higher number or mass of yeasts organisms to remove diacetyl by yeast via the action of various reductase enzymes. This reaction takes hours to complete and is affected by factors such as cell membrane composition that can be strain dependent or altered via amino acids present in the grains, temperature and pH.
Hope this helps.
Brad
Understood, and that's why I referred to it only as "risky," not "doomed to fail with 100% certainty."
Clearly my d-rest wasn't long enough. Usually a 3-4 day hold at 64f after fermentation ends is enough, but not this time (likely due to the greater diacetyl production at higher temps).
You call it "early d-rest," while I call it "fermenting hot".
I recently attended a BJCP prep course run by a pro brewer who brews great lagers. When it came to the yeast/fermentation part of the course, he mentioned that many German and U.S. brewers now use a method similar to what is described in this thread...ramping temps rapidly from the high 40's to 65 once 50% attenuation is reached. The theory is that the yeast is well beyond the growth phase at this point, so the risk of esters is low, and elevated temps help reduce diacetyl through increased enzymatic activity. So there is certainly merit to the process.
Perhaps you should try again with a higher quality (liquid) yeast, use pure O2 to oxygenate, and be sure to pitch very cold (44F).
My own experience with this method is like most others in this thread and apparently many great pro brewers - it works.
where did this idea of higher temps causing diacetyl come from? Higher temps mean more active yeast which means reduced diacetyl. I don't often need to do d rests, due to pitching adequate quantities of healthy yeast, but when I do, 68-70 works just fine for me.
ZebulonBrewer
Well-Known Member
During initial fermentation, certain yeasts (notably lagers) produce a lot of diacetyl. This cab be seen in those charts earlier where it shows warm fermentation.
You are correct, though, that later on in fermentation, higher temperature do accelerate the reduction of diacetyl (seen in the reduction slopes which show a 'rest')
