Rack or no?

[brownni5]

A few weeks ago, I brewed what will be the first of my multi-year Lambic (or whatever - not in Belgium, not spontaneous, etc. - but you get the idea). My hope is to age this one for 2-3 years and blend with younger versions of the same recipe brewed next year, the year after that, etc. I've always racked my long-term sours after the initial onslaught was over, and haven't seen a problem with acetic acid. I know that some oxygen ingress is desirable, and hence the barrels, but this is going in a Better Bottle. It's currently in a Bigmouth Bubbler, which is also somewhat oxygen permeable. Pros and cons to racking to the better bottle? Possibly too much oxygen ingress while racking is a con, freeing up my BMB is a pro (I'd rather ferment in it than the narrower Better Bottle). What else should I consider? At this point, I don't have any specific plans to introduce new bugs - the whole enchilada was pitched in primary.

 

[Andrew Hodgson]

I started my first lambic project last year and I pitched the Wyeast 3278 and then after 3 weeks I racked into a glass carboy for the remainder of fermentation. Seems to have worked fine, really have no pellicle still 6-7 months in so it seems O2 exposure is low. My reason for racking was the same as your O2 exposure and freeing up a bucket.

I'm sure more experienced sourists will chime in.

 

[RPh_Guy]

I don't think anyone here gets offended by us brewing Lambic, Flanders, Gose, Kolsch, Dortmunder, Berliner, etc.

Anecdotes:
I had to transfer my Flanders because the spigot started leaking ... It developed some acetic character after the transfer. (It wasn't topped up and I didn't purge the headspace ... but I did also want some light acetic, so it's all good.)

I use Fermonsters and I generally prefer to leave in primary. I've been getting excellent Brett character and no noticable acetic acid so far besides the one I transferred.
It seems to get the right amount of micro-oxygenation through the PET.

My thoughts:
There are no obvious pros to racking unless you need to use the primary for something else. The flavor may be different when it's aged off the cake, but there's certainly no consensus that either way is necessarily better. Figuring out what works for your taste is half the fun of brewing.

Professionals seem to prefer to minimize trub going into their barrels, I guess that's to maximize the beer coming out. $$$

 

[brownni5]

I was going to rack, but i suppose that would be one more jar with a culture and an airlock. I'll see if I really do need the fermenter for anything. It's very near full, so there isn't much headspace.

Worst case scenario, I buy another fermenter!

 

[redllama]

I think it all depends on how you plan on handling it long term. If it is just going to sit for the next 2-3 years I wouldn't rack. I've done this pretty successfully with keeping everything in primary for 12-18 months. I have just started a "solera" project in a half barrel sanke keg and for that I have been doing a primary in another vessel and then racking off. Since I plan on continuing to add to it every 6 months or so for the foreseeable future I am trying to keep trub to a minimum.

 

[isomerization]

I recently started a “Gueze” program myself. Ten gallons of this years batch have soured nicely (at about the 5 month mark).

My plan was to package 5 gallons now, fruit 4 gallons (looking at 2-3 lb/gal of tart cherries) and save 1 gallon for blending in 3 years.

Logic here is that the oldest lambic won’t be the majority of the blend. Is this correct, flawed or depends?

 

[brownni5]

Generally, I think yes, the oldest is the least prominent character, but for your beer, you won't really know that until blending time. I think you should give some consideration to allowing yourself more volume for blending, but really, only you can make that call.

 

[isomerization]

Generally, I think yes, the oldest is the least prominent character, but for your beer, you won't really know that until blending time. I think you should give some consideration to allowing yourself more volume for blending, but really, only you can make that call.

In addition to more very nice tasting beer now, I didn’t want to end up with three 5 gal batches for the blend, ideal 3-6 gal at that point. Less risk that it all blows up too I suppose.

 

[jrgtr42]

I would say to rack it over. Normally we don't worry about leaving it on yeast, but in this case, where you're aging long-term, I would say get it off the main yeast cake. There is enough souring bugs left in suspension to keep things going, and they'll take care of whatever oxygen is introduced by racking it.

 

[RPh_Guy]

they'll take care of whatever oxygen is introduced by racking it.

By turning it into acetic acid.

 

[redllama]

Logic here is that the oldest lambic won’t be the majority of the blend. Is this correct, flawed or depends?

I can't remember where I saw it but I think the ratios are typically 50-60% 1 year, 30-40% 2 year, and then the remaining balance of 10-15% 3 year. If nothing else that should get you the ballpark and if I had to guess the percentage of 1 year may be higher.

 

[sweetcell]

just to offer a different opinion, i am very pro-racking. however, it's important to rack at the end of primary, while there is still a little activity - will help with any O2 that is picked up during transfer. also, rack to a smaller vessel so you can eliminate headspace. for example, ferment in a 6.5 gallon carboy, then rack to a 5 gal carboy and fill it all way to the top, so that the liquid is within an inch of the bottom of the stopper. i have had no oxidation issues.

now if you're thinking of racking to another vessel of the same size, then racking is probably a bad idea. at least in the first vessel, you should have only CO2 in there at the end of primary. racking to same-sized secondary = O2 galore.