Secondary or no?

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

brechbräu

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Dec 31, 2024
Messages
36
Reaction score
24
Location
Manheim, PA USA
I’m getting back into brewing after a long hiatus. I started in 1999 with two-stage fermentation in glass. In a recent post when I asked about finings in a cloudy secondary, a few folks who responded said they no longer did secondary fermentation. I thought the purpose of racking into a secondary fermenter was to avoid off flavors from autolysis of the yeast. Is that no longer a concern? I’m thinking about getting a Ss Brewtech Brew Bucket and a Tilt mini, and if I could do everything in one fermenter, that would make life a lot easier and brewing a little less complicated. So, what are everyone’s thoughts on secondary versus no secondary? Is it really necessary or not? A lot of recipes still include that step…

Thanks for any insights or advice you can offer!
 
Secondary for beers that need to age a long time, i.e., several months or more. That's about it for me.

Otherwise, all fermentation can be accomplished in one fv. Even dry hopping, adding fruit, etc., can be done in the primary vessel.

The whole yeast autolysis problem at the homebrew level is a myth. It is an issue for commercial brewers, where pressures are much greater. But for us, not a problem until fermentation is ongoing a long time.
 
autolysis of the yeast
It's not that it can't happen, or something else to get off-flavors, but it's just unlikely at the home-brew level. Ferment, get the beer off after a month or two or so, and you wont' have any issues.

***edit***

Agreed w/ MaxStout above, looks like he beat me to it by a moment.
 
If the yeast goes into the beer in poor health, or is asked to do too much (super high gravity), it's more likely to have problems on the back end of fermentation. For the most part, it doesn't happen if you're using fresh ingredients. The beer generally doesn't need to sit around in bulk for very long anyway. You really want to get it into the final package as soon as it's reasonably haze free (unless it's a hazy beer on purpose).
 
Last edited:
Another issue with racking to a secondary fv is the exposure to oxygen and potential for infection to get in.

Even for long-term aging, in many cases you can avoid a secondary and just package and age in bottles. I just don't see many instances where a secondary has an advantage.
 
I also only use secondary for beers I want to age before bottling. The only advantage I see of aging in bulk vs in bottles is less sediment in the bottles after bulk aging.
 
Transfer to secondary. Yes, no or maybe? I keep seeing arguments for and against transferring to secondary. This got me wondering why we transfer to secondary.

Some observations from my experience.

I am not advocating for or against. Personally, I don’t, unless I’m fermenting a big beer I want to age some before I package.

I started homebrewing in 2001 while stationed in Germany. It was me, Charlie Papazian’s the Joy of Homebrewing and a recipe kit. My home brewery, an unheated storage room in my basement that stayed at a fairly steady 65F in the summer and 50F in the winter, the “standard” ale and lager fermentation temps. I had a naturally temperature-controlled fermentation chamber. Same here in the states, my brew room stays below 70F. More on that.

Back then, and even today, every recipe you bought says to transfer to secondary. Why? Yeast Autolysis, look it up, I’m not going to regurgitate the internet.

Until recently we homebrewers did not really understand the importance of fermentation temperature control. We were told to put our beer in a cool (60-75F) dark room and let the yeast do its thing. Then after a week transfer it to a secondary fermenter. Fermentation creates heat, and if your room was at 75F, who knows how hot your beer got. That heat would stress the yeast causing it to go through autolysis faster. The idea was/is to get the beer off the yeast cake before autolysis could occur. I never had an autolysis problem because my fermentation areas stayed temperature controlled.

I looked through the Joy of Home Brewing series and How to Brew 2nd edition and neither one referenced fermentation temperature control, just to put the fermenter in a cool, dark room. Not until 2017 did John Palmer in his 4th edition of How To Brew did he reference the importance of fermentation temperature control.

So Should you transfer to secondary? IMO if you can control the fermentation temperature, no. If the area you are fermenting in stays near or above the recommended temperature for your yeast, then yes. Again, my opinion.
 
My "secondary" these days is a keg. I just started on an Imperial Stout that's been literally under the stairs for the last 6 months or so.

I would think bottles can do the same thing as well, just mind any sediment when pouring.
 
Back
Top