Secondary necessary??

[BrewDey]

I just started and have read conflicting reports on the necessity of a secondary fermenter. On my 1st batch, I just used a 6 gal carboy with a blow-off hose...then replaced that with an airlock after about 4 days. It was only about 60 degrees at the warmest part of my basement, so I left it in there for 2 weeks.

I primed and bottled..tried it a week later. It tasted like beer..I was happy for that! But I did notice a strong 'alcoholic' taste. The banana aroma that I noticed during bottling was gone. My goal will be to make the taste as smooth as possible and I'm not sure if that roughness I tasted was due to simply not leaving it to condition long enough in the bottle (only 1 week)...or if the taste may suffer from only using one fermenter. Sorry if I sound dumb..I'm just starting!

 

[Big Al]

It's definately going to get better with time. 1 week is too soon. You need at least 2 weeks in the bottle, better 3.

 

[david_42]

Two weeks in the clearing tank will greatly improve your brew: A. it will be clearer with fewer grain and hop bits, B. it will be two weeks older when you drink it. The latter being the most important. If you bottle from the fermenter, plan on 4-5 weeks before drinking. Most moderate gravity ales are best around 3-5 months.

 

[Erbium:YAG]

Generally with ales, transfer into a secondary is not necessary. It's a different story when your brewing a lager though. As far as the taste of your one week old bottled brew, it should mellow a bit in a few more weeks. After that, any off flavors are going to be due to procedure.

 

[TheJadedDog]

I'm a big fan of giving my beer time (although I was pretty impatient when I started out too). Using a clearing tank (secondary) allows you to let your beer age without worrying about it sitting on a bunch of dead yeast.

I have found the 1-2-3 rule to work pretty well for the average brown ale, but for my latest few batches I have done 2-3-4 and my beer has been much better for it.

Remember, the bigger the beer, the longer the wait.

 

[BrewDey]

So if I understand this: extended time in a primary can hurt the flavor due to extended exposure to the yeast sediment...but in a secondary or in bottles, the longer the better (?)

 

[TheJadedDog]

More than a month in the primary could cause some off flavors, a few weeks isn't a problem though. I don't keep it in the secondary for more than 3 weeks or so either, it's just that I get a total of 5 weeks from brew day to bottling day.

As far as longer being better once it's bottled, longer is definitely better up to a point. Most ales tend to peak at around 3 months in the bottle unless they are really big and need longer.

 

[sirsloop]

This topic is up for debate. I know people that primary the beer, bottle, and drink it after a week. At first it may be hard to secondary for an extra week due to patience, but as you get into brewing you'll have stock of beer to hold you over until the precious beer has finished and conditioned.

I always secondary mine now, but you can EASILY get away with a standard dry stout after a week into bottles. Expect some cloudy bottles if you do a pale ale, and expect some off flavors if you do a big beer after 1 week.

 

[cweston]

This is a pretty controversial topic.

But the main thing your beer needs before being good is time. Many homebrewers follow the 1-2-3 principle (1 week in primary, 2 weeks in secondary, 3 weeks bottle conditioning) as a basic guideline.

But the important thing is that, according to 1-2-3, your beer is six weeks old before you start drinking it. (As mentioned above, most moderate gravity ales peak a little after this--perhaps around 3 months after brew day.)

Whether it spent 2 weeks in primary and 4 in the bottles, or 1 in primary, 3 in secondary, and 2 in the bottles matters (a little), but not nearly as much as the overall time.