Secondary fermentation

[Corey61753]

Just getting starting with home brewing and I have a question about whether or not secondary fermentation is needed and what would the purpose of it be. Thanks in advance.

 

[Revvy]

Here, read this...

Short answer... "Secondary fermentation" is a misnomer... what you're asking is, should you rack to secondary to condition your beer? It's up to you. Many, many of us find that leaing the beer for a month in primary makes for great beers, and eliminates the risk for oxygenation or contamination for racking for what amounts to two weeks...

 

[SlitheryDee]

The main advantage seems to be cutting down on the trub before bottling or kegging, and freeing up your primary fermenter in the event that you need to put another batch in it. Trub is kind of a non-issue for most people though. It settles to the bottom and you just avoid it when siphoning the beer out.

I believe you end up with a little more sediment in the bottles and kegs when you package directly out of the primary, but that's easily dealt with by discarding the first pint or so off the keg or leaving about 1/2 inch in the bottles when you pour. Besides, racking to a secondary doesn't completely eliminate bottle and keg sediment anyway, so you're going to be dealing with it to some extent in either case.

Another use case for a secondary is for bulk aging a beer that can benefit from it. You generally don't want your beer sitting on the trub for more than about a month because it will start to break down and create off flavors in the beer. If you want to give your beer two months of conditioning time before packaging for instance, you probably need to get it off the trub and into a secondary.

 

[Revvy]

I believe you end up with a little more sediment in the bottles and kegs when you package directly out of the primary, but that's easily dealt with by discarding the first pint or so off the keg or leaving about 1/2 inch in the bottles when you pour. Besides, racking to a secondary doesn't completely eliminate bottle and keg sediment anyway, so you're going to be dealing with it to some extent in either case.

My experience from doing it for the better part of a decade is you have less sediment if you do an extended primary. The yeast cake compress, which does several things- 1 it tightens which means less yeast transfers over to your bottling bucket. Secondly, as the yeast compresses, you actually get a lot more beer back. When I bottle after a month long primary I get about 53, 12 ounce bottles as opposed to about 48-49 when I used to secondary. What happens as the yeast cake compresses is it seems to be like squeezing a sponge, the yeast kind of comes out of that solution, and you get that liquid back.

Besides the fact that the beer usually appears clearer and has a cleaner taste... that's why over the last few years more and more people have come to prefer it to just racking for no logical reason....

it used to be you racked even when dryhopping, but even now a lot of people including me just DH in primary for the last week of the month.

Now really the only reasons are if you are after a TRUE secondary fermenation i.e. adding fruit- (this is why "secondary fermentation" is a misnomer OP- most of the time when new brewer says Secondary Fermentation they're not actually talking about fermenting more sugars of some sort in the beer, they're talking about using the secondary as a "bright tank" to extended age their beer.

Which is the other reason to rack to secondary...if you are making a BIG beer that needs to bulk condition/age.. we're talking not a couple weeks, but months or years.... not just the 14 days a lot of oldschool information says to do (from back when people were scared of yeast.) Then yes, a secondary is a good thing to use.

But if you're making an "average" drinking beer, something that is only going to be a few weeks from grain to glass, then leaving it for 3-4 weeks is hassle free, AND for many we have experienced better quality beer.

But, YMMV... *shrug*

 

[Revvy]

Another use case for a secondary is for bulk aging a beer that can benefit from it. You generally don't want your beer sitting on the trub for more than about a month because it will start to break down and create off flavors in the beer. If you want to give your beer two months of conditioning time before packaging for instance, you probably need to get it off the trub and into a secondary.

Oh I missed this.. now I know where you're coming from, you are a decade behind in your understanding...THis whole "off flavors from yeast" nonesense has totally been long disproven, even by some of the folks, like John Palmer in the free first edition of HTB, who inadvertently spread it....

Really, read the thread I linked... most of the people like Jamil, and Palmer have changed their tune about the "autolysis" bogeyman.. and very few still repeat that old chestnut...

That belief you're operating under as long, long, long gone the way of the dinosaurs....

 

[brandonlovesbeer]

This topic has been done to death. Just do a search.
But. No.
Most of the time it's not needed unless you are planning to age your beer or put it on fruit, etc.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Oh I missed this.. now I know where you're coming from, you are a decade behind in your understanding...THis whole "off flavors from yeast" nonesense has totally been long disproven, even by some of the folks, like John Palmer in the free first edition of HTB, who inadvertently spread it....

Really, read the thread I linked... most of the people like Jamil, and Palmer have changed their tune about the "autolysis" bogeyman.. and very few still repeat that old chestnut...

That belief you're operating under as long, long, long gone the way of the dinosaurs....

Huh. That's good to hear. I guess since it's been repeated in all my reading I took it as a given. It's even in the latest "fully revised" editions of "The complete joy of homebrewing" and "how to brew". Papazian actually recommends not leaving it on the trub for more than 3 weeks. I'm gonna go read that thread now lol.

 

[kh54s10]

IMO, there is also no reason to wait for a month on primary. When I started the directions on the kit were 1-2 weeks primary, 2-4 weeks secondary 1-2 weeks bottle conditioning.

I started reading and Primary only was becoming common with most saying wait a month or more. Others were saying 2 weeks is plenty. I split the difference and went with 3 weeks. I have since decided that 10 days is probably plenty for most beers, but go 14 days to be sure it is done. I also look at the clarity. If it is still cloudy I leave it longer.

With procrastination on bottling/kegging I have left some in primary much longer. The longest was over 5 months. I don't know what it should have tasted like since it was a recipe that I made up with hops that I had never used before. But, it was quite good.

In other words - how long in primary is up to you. Doing a secondary is also a choice. It may make the beer a bit more clear, but at small risk of infection or oxidation. It is also an extra step that, IMO, is work that I don't need to do.

 

[kh54s10]

IMO, there is also no reason to wait for a month on primary. When I started the directions on the kit were 1-2 weeks primary, 2-4 weeks secondary 1-2 weeks bottle conditioning.

I started reading and Primary only was becoming common with most saying wait a month or more. Others were saying 2 weeks is plenty. I split the difference and went with 3 weeks. I have since decided that 10 days is probably plenty for most beers, but go 14 days to be sure it is done. I also look at the clarity. If it is still cloudy I leave it longer.

With procrastination on bottling/kegging I have left some in primary much longer. The longest was over 5 months. I don't know what it should have tasted like since it was a recipe that I made up with hops that I had never used before. But, it was quite good.

In other words - how long in primary is up to you. Doing a secondary is also a choice. It may make the beer a bit more clear, but at small risk of infection or oxidation. It is also an extra step that, IMO, is work that I don't need to do.

 

[Revvy]

Huh. That's good to hear. I guess since it's been repeated in all my reading I took it as a given. It's even in the latest "fully revised" editions of "The complete joy of homebrewing" and "how to brew". Papazian actually recommends not leaving it on the trub for more than 3 weeks. I'm gonna go read that thread now lol.

And that thread is even ancient.. just from the cusp in homebrewing history where Palmer acknowleded that basically he just repeated what HE had heard.. without research, from folks like Papazian... because, and in that thread I'm pretty sure I outline the history, reasoning, and even validity of that statement... back in the 70's....

Basically, we know more today.. mostly from internet "peer review" which is two way as opposed to books which are a one way transmission of info... but when places like this, ESPECIALLY this place came online and people could share their experiences, then you questioned, and experimented, and experience it yourself and shared your experience...so he was forced to back pedal in the face of so many people saying, "Hey I left my beer in primary for 4 months when I was in the hospital, and it was the best beer I ever made..." and other stories.


And the main reason is simple- Better, modern, fresher HEALTHIER yeast, that hasn't been sitting for months or years taped to a tin of extract, doesn't autolyze if you look at it funny. Just the opposite, healthier yeast actually likes to clean up after itself if left alone, making for cleaner, clearer and crisper tasting beer.

It's like the above poster has said, this topic really has been done to death, most of the reasons have been disproven.. and it's no longer an issue.. or argument...it's more a realization that either way works fine, so it becomes a matter of preference... Like I said earlier, ymmv

Personally for me, I noticed I got more medals, higher scores and better comments on beers I extended primaried than beers that I secondaried... and having most of my friends being beer judges, and who don't pull punches, even with each other's beers- people have always loved my beers... So I do it most of the time.

The biggest take away from it all is DON'T RUSH THE PROCESS.. if you do opt for secondary, wait for the beer to finish fermenting.. and the way to do that is NOT to count bubbles, NOT to listen to what instructions because yeast can't read and take their own damn time to do things... but if you move take gravity readings around the two week mark THEN make your decision only if fermentation is complete.

But if you opt for long primary you don't really need to confirm it or not... just pitch yeast and come back in 3-4 weeks and keg or bottle...

 

[bajaedition]

those that do not secondary are loud a F&*K about it, those that do normally just sit back, smile and laugh when the horns are being blown about not needing to rack off the sludge.

Do you change your sheets? or just keep sleeping on the crap that builds up?

think of it that way

 

[cattmoble]

Touché bajaedition

 

[bajaedition]

Touché bajaedition

>passing the popcorn and serving a beer<

just wait, sit back in that recliner, this is going be an E ticket ride.

 

[VladOfTrub]

Short answer... "Secondary fermentation" is a misnomer....

Nah, not really, except for perhaps in the home made beer, craft brew world.

You see, when home made American style beer is brewed by using the single infusion method and with the less expensive, modern, high modified malt home brewers purchase because they are told it is good stuff, second fermentation doesn't occur. It will not occur, Momma Nature says it won't. It has to due with the sugar imbalanced wort drawn from single infusion along with using enzymatically poor malt. The enzymatic richness of the malt is such that only one enzyme is left in it strong enough to work and only a single high temperature rest is needed to activate the enzyme. The enzyme is Alpha. Alpha on its own cannot release the types of sugar that yeast use during second fermentation. Alpha on its own cannot produce Ale and Lager, unless the definition of the styles have been changed to fit the liquid that home brewers have been taught to make.
During second fermentation yeast deals with certain types of sugar called complex sugar, maltose and malto-triose. Yeast cannot use complex sugar for fuel, yeast needs simple sugar like glucose for fuel. Alpha provides the fuel during the time when it is liquefying the simple starch chain amylose. If decent malt was used along with a maltose rest second fermentation would take place because during the maltose rest Beta activates. Beta is responsible for conversion. Beta converts simple sugar released by Alpha into complex types of sugar, di and tri-saccharides. Another type of conversion occurs during second fermentation when the yeast converts complex sugar back into simple sugar glucose.

After primary fermentation the wort glucose level is depleted and most of the alcohol will be present along with CO2. Yeast does little and everything stops and gravity kind of stabilizes. But, not really.
During second fermentation yeast absorbs maltose and the enzymes within yeast converts the maltose back into glucose which is used as fuel and gravity reduces. During the aging cycle yeast does the same thing with malto-triose and natural carbonation occurs. Due to sugar imbalanced wort home made beer needs to be sugar primed or carbed with CO2.
Due to a type of starch not being used because the temperate during single infusion is not high enough to cause the starch to enter into solution the beer will lack body. The starch ends up in the compost pile. Instead of calling it starch call it your money.

So, is second fermentation needed? Nope, not if the brewing method and ingredients cannot provide what is needed for second fermentation to occur.

Will second fermentation take place if Ale, other than single infusion method, home made style Ale is produced? Yes.

It looks like everything works in the home brew world as long as a marketer selling books, recipes and or ingredients about making beer says it works. For the single infusion to produce anything but home made style beer with the less expensive, modern malt home brewers use, the malt would have to be so perfect that all of the enzymes, if they exist, would need to work harmoniously at a single temperature, at a single pH in an hour or so. The malt doesn't exist on the planet of the Earth.

 

[bajaedition]

So Vlad, a person doing a 4 step infusion is more likely to have secondary fermentation than one doing a single? But the consensus is that those of us doing step mashes are wasting our time.

 

[crunch1224]

Short answer... "Secondary fermentation" is a misnomer....

Nah, not really, except for perhaps in the home made beer, craft brew world.

You see, when home made American style beer is brewed by using the single infusion method and with the less expensive, modern, high modified malt home brewers purchase because they are told it is good stuff, second fermentation doesn't occur. It will not occur, Momma Nature says it won't. It has to due with the sugar imbalanced wort drawn from single infusion along with using enzymatically poor malt. The enzymatic richness of the malt is such that only one enzyme is left in it strong enough to work and only a single high temperature rest is needed to activate the enzyme. The enzyme is Alpha. Alpha on its own cannot release the types of sugar that yeast use during second fermentation. Alpha on its own cannot produce Ale and Lager, unless the definition of the styles have been changed to fit the liquid that home brewers have been taught to make.
During second fermentation yeast deals with certain types of sugar called complex sugar, maltose and malto-triose. Yeast cannot use complex sugar for fuel, yeast needs simple sugar like glucose for fuel. Alpha provides the fuel during the time when it is liquefying the simple starch chain amylose. If decent malt was used along with a maltose rest second fermentation would take place because during the maltose rest Beta activates. Beta is responsible for conversion. Beta converts simple sugar released by Alpha into complex types of sugar, di and tri-saccharides. Another type of conversion occurs during second fermentation when the yeast converts complex sugar back into simple sugar glucose.

After primary fermentation the wort glucose level is depleted and most of the alcohol will be present along with CO2. Yeast does little and everything stops and gravity kind of stabilizes. But, not really.
During second fermentation yeast absorbs maltose and the enzymes within yeast converts the maltose back into glucose which is used as fuel and gravity reduces. During the aging cycle yeast does the same thing with malto-triose and natural carbonation occurs. Due to sugar imbalanced wort home made beer needs to be sugar primed or carbed with CO2.
Due to a type of starch not being used because the temperate during single infusion is not high enough to cause the starch to enter into solution the beer will lack body. The starch ends up in the compost pile. Instead of calling it starch call it your money.

So, is second fermentation needed? Nope, not if the brewing method and ingredients cannot provide what is needed for second fermentation to occur.

Will second fermentation take place if Ale, other than single infusion method, home made style Ale is produced? Yes.

It looks like everything works in the home brew world as long as a marketer selling books, recipes and or ingredients about making beer says it works. For the single infusion to produce anything but home made style beer with the less expensive, modern malt home brewers use, the malt would have to be so perfect that all of the enzymes, if they exist, would need to work harmoniously at a single temperature, at a single pH in an hour or so. The malt doesn't exist on the planet of the Earth.

So many questions.

What is (decent malt and where do you buy it).

Just how much of a difference in ABV are we talking about.

You say the beer will lack body, then how are we making beer with body not using this special malt or even using a secondary.

How much money are you talking about by "tossing the starch into a compost pile".

 

[madscientist451]

I rack beer to secondary when I'm adding fruit, oak, or bulk aging something like a sour beer.
As my keg collection has grown, I've been bulk aging in kegs, but I suppose that isn't really a secondary since I'm generally not fermenting any more in the keg.
I plan in advance so I minimize
headspace in the secondary where possible.
Besides that, straight to the keg or bottling, seems to work fine.