Secondary Fermentation or Primary only?

[srkaeppler]

Hi All-

After reading Palmer's and Papazian's book, they both advocate that after a beer is done in primary fermentation(when the kreusen has fallen), you should rack it over to a secondary fermenter. I am coming to learn that this 'conventional' idea isn't always the case. Many people advocate keeping the beer in primary for longer(after kreusen has fallen) and then directly bottling. I think the idea is that if you are brewing a higher gravity beer, keeping the wort on the trub/cake will allow the wort more opportunity to have the full effect of the yeast. Are there other reasons? I generally am of the mindset that you should rack over pretty much right away, just because you may get off flavors keeping it on trub/cake for too long. Is this true? Or is this not true?

At any rate, I am just wondering what the reasoning is for keeping it on the cake(if there are additional points/advantages) and also the advantages for racking over. And maybe most importantly, if there are any good 'rules of thumb' regarding when it keep it in primary vs when to rack over to secondary. I am just trying to develop good practices!

As an aside, I typically use two stage fermentation... I prefer it and have had good results doing it so far. I also have had really good experiences aging in bottles. Personally, I would have "good beer, rather than quick beer."

Thanks all!

Steve

 

[DrawTap88]

You don't have to use a secondary, unless you're adding fruit or dry hopping. It is actually beneficial to leave the beer on the primary yeast cake, to allow the yeast to reasorb diacetyl, and other off flavor causing compounds, as they prepare to go dormant.

There are also many stories on this board about beers being left on the primary cake for months without any off flavors from dead/decaying yeast.

 

[InLimbo]

For what it's worth, Palmer actually doesn't advocate racking to secondary for most styles of beer. Which edition did you read? I've got the 3rd addition, and he said that he even did a Vienna lager strictly in Primary, and it tasted great.

The risk of autolysis is so low on the homebrew scale that I personally would rather leave the beer in primary rather than potentially expose my beer to contamination and oxygenation by racking to secondary.

However if I were doing a lager, or especially a barleywine I would most likely rack to secondary.

 

[two_hearted]

No offense, but this is literally covered in dozens and dozens of other threads. Like this one: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/

 

[InLimbo]

You don't have to use a secondary, unless you're adding fruit or dry hopping.

I agree with fruit, but you can dry hop in primary. You just have to wait until fermentation has slowed down.

 

[SKMO]

A bit of semantics here, but once you pitch the yeast it is no longer "wort" but "beer".

Personally I only rack a batch to a secondary maybe once a year. If I can get it to finish in 8 weeks I'll leave it as be in primary. If your initial ferm temperatures were close to being in line, just leave it alone.

A higher gravity beer that you need to let sit 3-6+ months before bottling or kegging I might rethink this, and get it off the trub. But there is no one correct answer to the question.

 

[dleonard]

I agree with fruit, but you can dry hop in primary. You just have to wait until fermentation has slowed down.

After years of using secondary to dry hop I've just started doing this, and it's the way to go for sure!

 

[LiquidLunch5211]

would transferring the beer to a secondary make the beer more clear as well, I just transferred mine to a secondary, how long would you recommend me leaving it there before kegging?

 

[DrawTap88]

I agree with fruit, but you can dry hop in primary. You just have to wait until fermentation has slowed down.

To each his own. I only dry hop in the secondary since it's easier for me to wash the yeast from the primary without the hop particulates in it.

 

[Revvy]

Hi All-

After reading Palmer's and Papazian's book, they both advocate that after a beer is done in primary fermentation(when the kreusen has fallen), you should rack it over to a secondary fermenter.

Palmer has changed his tune on that subject.

ermenting the beer is just a part of what the yeast do. If you leave the beer alone, they will go back and clean up the byproducts of fermentation that often lead to off flavors. That's why many brewers skip secondary and leave our beers alone in primary for a month. It leaves plenty of time for the yeast to ferment, clean up after themselves and then fall out, leveing our beers crystal clear, with a tight yeast cake.

We have multiple threads about this all over the place, like this one https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/ignore-instructions-do-not-bottle-after-5-10-days-78298/

If you leave the beer alone, they will go back and clean up the byproducts of fermentation that often lead to off flavors. That's why many brewers skip secondary and leave our beers alone in primary for a month. It leaves plenty of time for the yeast to ferment, clean up after themselves and then fall out, leveing our beers crystal clear, with a tight yeast cake.

This is the latest recommendation, it is the same one many of us have been giving for several years on here.

Tom from Michigan asks:
I have a few questions about secondary fermentations. I've read both pros and cons for 2nd fermentations and it is driving me crazy what to do. One, are they necessary for lower Gravity beers?
Two, what is the dividing line between low gravity and high gravity beers? Is it 1.060 and higher?
Three, I have an American Brown Ale in the primary right now, a SG of 1.058, Should I secondary ferment this or not?
Your advice is appreciated, thanks for all you do!

Allen from New York asks:
John, please talk about why or why not you would NOT use a secondary fermenter (bright tank?) and why or why not a primary only fermentation is a good idea. In other words, give some clarification or reason why primary only is fine, versus the old theory of primary then secondary normal gravity ale fermentations.

Palmer answers:
These are good questions – When and why would you need to use a secondary fermenter? First some background – I used to recommend racking a beer to a secondary fermenter. My recommendation was based on the premise that (20 years ago) larger (higher gravity) beers took longer to ferment completely, and that getting the beer off the yeast reduced the risk of yeast autolysis (ie., meaty or rubbery off-flavors) and it allowed more time for flocculation and clarification, reducing the amount of yeast and trub carryover to the bottle. Twenty years ago, a homebrewed beer typically had better flavor, or perhaps less risk of off-flavors, if it was racked off the trub and clarified before bottling. Today that is not the case.

The risk inherent to any beer transfer, whether it is fermenter-to-fermenter or fermenter-to-bottles, is oxidation and staling. Any oxygen exposure after fermentation will lead to staling, and the more exposure, and the warmer the storage temperature, the faster the beer will go stale.

Racking to a secondary fermenter used to be recommended because staling was simply a fact of life – like death and taxes. But the risk of autolysis was real and worth avoiding – like cholera. In other words, you know you are going to die eventually, but death by cholera is worth avoiding.

But then modern medicine appeared, or in our case, better yeast and better yeast-handling information. Suddenly, death by autolysis is rare for a beer because of two factors: the freshness and health of the yeast being pitched has drastically improved, and proper pitching rates are better understood. The yeast no longer drop dead and burst like Mr. Creosote from Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life when fermentation is complete – they are able to hibernate and wait for the next fermentation to come around. The beer has time to clarify in the primary fermenter without generating off-flavors. With autolysis no longer a concern, staling becomes the main problem. The shelf life of a beer can be greatly enhanced by avoiding oxygen exposure and storing the beer cold (after it has had time to carbonate).

Therefore I, and Jamil and White Labs and Wyeast Labs, do not recommend racking to a secondary fermenter for ANY ale, except when conducting an actual second fermentation, such as adding fruit or souring. Racking to prevent autolysis is not necessary, and therefore the risk of oxidation is completely avoidable. Even lagers do not require racking to a second fermenter before lagering. With the right pitching rate, using fresh healthy yeast, and proper aeration of the wort prior to pitching, the fermentation of the beer will be complete within 3-8 days (bigger = longer). This time period includes the secondary or conditioning phase of fermentation when the yeast clean up acetaldehyde and diacetyl. The real purpose of lagering a beer is to use the colder temperatures to encourage the yeast to flocculate and promote the precipitation and sedimentation of microparticles and haze.

So, the new rule of thumb: don’t rack a beer to a secondary, ever, unless you are going to conduct a secondary fermentation.

THIS is where the latest discussion and all your questions answered.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/

We basically proved that old theory wrong on here 5 years ago, and now the rest fo the brewing community is catching up. Though a lot of old dogs don't tend to follow the latest news, and perpetuate the old stuff.

The autolysis from prolong yeast contact has fallen by the wayside, in fact yeast contact is now seen as a good thing.

All my beers sit a minimum of 1 month in the primary. And I recently bottled a beer that sat in primary for 5.5 months with no ill effects.....

You'll find that more and more recipes these days do not advocate moving to a secondary at all, but mention primary for a month, which is starting to reflect the shift in brewing culture that has occurred in the last 4 years, MOSTLY because of many of us on here, skipping secondary, opting for longer primaries, and writing about it. Recipes in BYO have begun stating that in their magazine. I remember the "scandal" it caused i the letters to the editor's section a month later, it was just like how it was here when we began discussing it, except a lot more civil than it was here. But after the Byo/Basic brewing experiment, they started reflecting it in their recipes.

 

[beesy]

I used to secondary when I first started brewing because other people and sources said to do it ( I think Palmers's book was part of the reason I originally did it). I do not secondary anything anymore unless it's getting special treatment - fruit, dryhop, oak aging, coffee, finings, etc.

The gravity of the beer and the style plays a role in how long I leave it on the yeast, but all my beers stay in primary for at least 2 weeks, usually 3. Hoppy beers and light beers come off closer to 2-3 weeks and bigger beers stay on longer. Just find something that's comfortable for you.

 

[AaronKeller]

I've found that for certain styles, racking my beer to a secondary will decrease the time it takes the beer to clear. I have experienced strange bitter flavors following a long period in the primary (about 8 weeks). I can't be certain they were from sitting on the trub/yeast cake but they didn't seem to be present in the beer immediately after primary fermentation. Also, from a practical standpoint. . .racking to one of my 5 gal secondaries frees up one of my 6.5 gal primary for a new batch!