To Lager, or Not to Lager...

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

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

philm63

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
106
Reaction score
22
Location
Plain City, OH
My first lager, a Helles, is ready to transfer to a keg today, and I am grappling with the urge to put it on line within, say, a week or so as opposed to the typically prescribed lagering period.

This is not about me being impatient - I have plenty of tasty brew on tap currently - it's just that I read a Brulosophy bit on this topic today, and it essentially said good results are had these days by just controlling the temps "properly" during fermentation - which I have, and there should be no need for extended lagering periods if this is done right.

I did what I believe was a typical fermentation for this style - pitched two sachets of 34/70 at 50 F, waited until fermentation was at least 50% done (gravity check - hydrometer), slowly raised the temp to 65 F over 4 days while it finished up then let it sit another 4 days to clean up, then slowly brought it down to 37 F over 3 days. It has been sitting at 37 F for two full days now and I am preparing to keg it today.

I could then place the keg in a temp-controlled chest freezer at 33-34 F and lager it, but then transferring it from the freezer to my kegerator, I would think, will stir up some sediment, no? Alternately, I could leave it in the unitank on glycol at 37 F for another week while I suck down what's left in a keg of Kolsch thus freeing up space in the kegerator, and just lager it in the kegerator - but this would tie up a tap for however long I manage to force myself to lager this thing.

Who here puts their lagers on tap within a week or so after packaging?
 
Lager it. I always think time helps with lagers.

Or, better yet, do both man. Have some now. Leave it alone for a week. Come back. Have one or 2. Come back again a week later. Have a few more. See what you think is best!
 
This is not about me being impatient - I have plenty of tasty brew on tap currently - it's just that I read a Brulosophy bit on this topic today, and it essentially said good results are had these days by just controlling the temps "properly" during fermentation - which I have, and there should be no need for extended lagering periods if this is done right.

Lagering provides the time and the cold temperature needed for proteins and polyphenols to form aggregates and drop out of suspension. Fermentation doesn't do that, regardless of how "properly" the temps were controlled.
 
I say it is a voyage of discovery. Since it is your first lager, tap it up and see what it tastes like. Monitor how it changes over time as well. Then next time you brew the same beer, lager it and see if it makes a difference for your preferences. First hand knowledge is the best. Also, you have already brought it down to 37f, so you have dropped some extra stuff out.
 
I certainly could lager it for 4-6 weeks at 33-34 F in the old fermeezer as originally planned, but the concern still is stirring up the sediment when I move the keg over to the kegerator. I could put a line on the keg and push a pint or so out before moving it over to the kegerator - do you suppose that would mitigate some of the "stirring up the sediment" concern?
 
My first Lager I brewed in March then lagered until late Sept. Just cuz I wanted that sort of true Marzen way. I wont wait that long again , it was torture tbo . I did sample some at 2 & 5 months to make sure all was well. MMP126 has a good idea of now and later .
 
I've used that exact fast lagering method for about 15 brews. It certainly could not hurt to do a more traditional lager afterwards, but the whole idea is for that to replace a traditional lagering. Don't know if this is accurate, but the way I conceptualize it is that doing the end of fermentation at higher temps does what the longer lagering does, but in a shorter period.

Regardless of whether that's the reason or not, though, I've definitely had great results with that method, consistently.
 
+1 to what MMP1216 said. I do WF lagers a lot, and they are usually just fine straight out the gate after kegging/chilling for a few days; but do get better with some time. I AM impatient and want my beers on tap as soon as possible (usually due to poor pipeline planning on my part, alliteration is my friend). If you plan on doing this beer again, seeing how it tastes throughout the lagering process will tell you when it's really ready.
 
As someone who's very new to Homebrewing, I would have been put off of lagers for a while longer (no pun intended). I'm sure most new brewers are and for good reason. Brülosophy has been changing my mind about that though. 7-10 days to bottling or kegging?
Easy! I might do that tomorrow night.
Not really, as I still only have Baker's yeast. Ha.😝:bigmug:
 
If it tastes good drink it. After a few weeks when the keg kicks you will realize it tasted the best. Beer is a discovery.
 
As someone who's very new to Homebrewing, I would have been put off of lagers for a while longer (no pun intended). I'm sure most new brewers are and for good reason. Brülosophy has been changing my mind about that though. 7-10 days to bottling or kegging?
Easy! I might do that tomorrow night.

Which Brulosophy experiment convinced you?
 
Which Brulosophy experiment convinced you?
I've been listening to the podcast since I heard about them and "short & shoddy" is mentioned a lot.
I figured if he's this adamant, must be something there.
 
I've been listening to the podcast since I heard about them and "short & shoddy" is mentioned a lot.
I figured if he's this adamant, must be something there.

The reason I asked is that, IIRC, the original fast lager triangle test experiment they did showed very clearly that there was a difference between the traditional and fast method.
 
The reason I asked is that, IIRC, the original fast lager triangle test experiment they did showed very clearly that there was a difference between the traditional and fast method.
I listened to this 2 days ago. They went on for an hour about how there's no discernable difference.
At some point I'll Lager something correctly, but I will be happy to experiment with the "short & shoddy" method.
Screenshot_20200502-131226_Chrome.jpg
 
From "LAGER METHODS – PT. 1: TRADITIONAL VS. QUICK FERMENTATION"
http://brulosophy.com/2016/09/19/la...al-vs-quick-fermentation-exbeeriment-results/
"Data for this xBmt was collected on two occasions separated by 7 days, the first occurring in my garage and the second at a monthly Tulare County Homebrewers Organization for Perfect Suds (TCHOPS) meeting. A total of 31 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each participant was blindly served 2 samples of the traditional lager and 1 sample of the quick lager then instructed to identify the one that was different. In order to achieve statistical significance given the sample size, 16 participants (P<0.05) would have had to correctly identify the quick lager sample as being unique. In the end, 17 tasters (p=0.01) made the accurate selection, indicating tasters were reliably able to distinguish a beer made using the quick lager method from one made with a more traditional fermentation schedule.

The tasters who were correct on the triangle test were subsequently asked to complete a brief evaluation comparing only the different beers while still blind to the variable being investigated. The traditionally fermented lager was preferred by 11 of the 17 tasters with another 4 preferring the quick lager batch and 2 saying they noticed a difference by had no preference. In conversations following completion with the xBmt, the most common comments had to do with how similar the beers were in general. Interestingly, one taster, still blind to both the variable and the style of beer, remarked that the quick method beer had a subtle sulfur note it that “makes it tastes more like a Pilsner,” while another taster noted the traditional batch has tasting “a little more sweet, less crisp” than the quick batch."

What the above is saying is that for the shortcut fermentation method vs the traditional method, 17 of 31 triangle tasters identified the different sample, and that if there were no difference, there was only a 1% chance that 17 or more could have gotten it right.

Note that this particular experiment was about fermentation temps, and not about lagering.
 
next time using 34/70 ferment it out at 65F the whole way, chill and fine or just chill and taste periodically. it should taste great in no time. no need to wait months unless you’re a purist.

moving it won’t cause issues for long just do it carefully. if u will be moving kegs around in the future get a floating dip tube setup. they are great for beers you want to drink clearer faster anyway
 
From "LAGER METHODS – PT. 1: TRADITIONAL VS. QUICK FERMENTATION"
http://brulosophy.com/2016/09/19/la...al-vs-quick-fermentation-exbeeriment-results/
"Data for this xBmt was collected on two occasions separated by 7 days, the first occurring in my garage and the second at a monthly Tulare County Homebrewers Organization for Perfect Suds (TCHOPS) meeting. A total of 31 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each participant was blindly served 2 samples of the traditional lager and 1 sample of the quick lager then instructed to identify the one that was different. In order to achieve statistical significance given the sample size, 16 participants (P<0.05) would have had to correctly identify the quick lager sample as being unique. In the end, 17 tasters (p=0.01) made the accurate selection, indicating tasters were reliably able to distinguish a beer made using the quick lager method from one made with a more traditional fermentation schedule.

The tasters who were correct on the triangle test were subsequently asked to complete a brief evaluation comparing only the different beers while still blind to the variable being investigated. The traditionally fermented lager was preferred by 11 of the 17 tasters with another 4 preferring the quick lager batch and 2 saying they noticed a difference by had no preference. In conversations following completion with the xBmt, the most common comments had to do with how similar the beers were in general. Interestingly, one taster, still blind to both the variable and the style of beer, remarked that the quick method beer had a subtle sulfur note it that “makes it tastes more like a Pilsner,” while another taster noted the traditional batch has tasting “a little more sweet, less crisp” than the quick batch."

What the above is saying is that for the shortcut fermentation method vs the traditional method, 17 of 31 triangle tasters identified the different sample, and that if there were no difference, there was only a 1% chance that 17 or more could have gotten it right.

Note that this particular experiment was about fermentation temps, and not about lagering.

I particularly like this xbmt because in some other tests, they compare "high vs low fermentation temperature", where the low temperature batch gets the "quick lager" method.
When these fail to show a significant result, I immediately think of that xbmt and wonder whether maybe the "quick lager method" produces a beer more similar to one produced at higher temperatures.

I currently have a Helles finishing up at 8 celsius which was pitched at 5 celsius. It's my first attempt at such a schedule. After the long wait, this better be good...
 
My experience as an impatient brewer has been that it always gets better over time when lagering. It's possible to brew a lager style that isn't offputting in taste without really lagering it but it still gets better as time goes on. The last few beers are always the best for me.

This is with 34/70. I haven't been able to get a decent tasting s-189 without lagering.
 
I particularly like this xbmt because in some other tests, they compare "high vs low fermentation temperature", where the low temperature batch gets the "quick lager" method.
When these fail to show a significant result, I immediately think of that xbmt and wonder whether maybe the "quick lager method" produces a beer more similar to one produced at higher temperatures.

I currently have a Helles finishing up at 8 celsius which was pitched at 5 celsius. It's my first attempt at such a schedule. After the long wait, this better be good...
you’re gonna feel so taken advantage of if it’s not good. ha ha. i notice that when i’ve done long slow cold lager ferments it takes a ton more yeast or i can get sulfur flavors that just hang around a long time. i HATE those sulfur notes. it’s worth it to me to just ferment warm to avoid those. i suppose i should compare cold and slow vs warm sometime though.
 
you’re gonna feel so taken advantage of if it’s not good. ha ha. i notice that when i’ve done long slow cold lager ferments it takes a ton more yeast or i can get sulfur flavors that just hang around a long time. i HATE those sulfur notes. it’s worth it to me to just ferment warm to avoid those. i suppose i should compare cold and slow vs warm sometime though.

Haha, yeah, I brewed this in anticipation of being disappointed. I'm from Munich (also currently love there), so I've had my fair share of Helles and have a rather narrow idea in my head what a Helles should be and what it shouldn't be. I've been brewing for a couple of years now, but always avoided making a Helles, because (a) you're bound to drink it whenever you go out anyways (b) you're bound to perceive any deviation from commercial examples as a defect.

And, yes, sulphur is a very particular thing. People usually describe lagers as "clean", but I do not find them "clean" at all. They have a very strong, distinctive fermentation character. I'm trying to capture that with the slow cold fermentation. Wish me luck.
 
For the best of both worlds...;)

*First 6-8 days: Ferment in the mid-50’s
*Rack to keg w/ 4oz dissolved dextrose or DME. Place keg somewhere warmer (Low 60’s) for 3-4 days for a D-rest and to allow natural carbonation to start
*Ramp down to serving temp over a few days
*Drink half of the keg as a fresh Keller beer between Week 3-6
*Save the other half and sample it over a month or two. This way, you'll learn how the beer tastes at various stages. Saaz-heavy Czech Pilsners are sublime as keller beers while the hops are still vibrant, FWIW. Sort of like a saaz NEIPA, and I generally don't like NEIPA's. Or would that be a NEIPL?

You will have a little more yeast in the bottom of the keg with this method, so shortening the dip tube by a 1/2" with a cheap cutting tool helps.

Half the fun is experimenting with all the options to see what you prefer. Prost!

Cutter.JPG
 
On occasion, I've had to sulfur-scrub a lager. It's pretty easy. Slowly push CO2 down the liquid dip tube (5-7 PSI or so) while the keg lid's PRV is open. A 15-20 second "shot" on two consecutive days usually does the trick. It stirs up any settled yeast though.
 
On occasion, I've had to sulfur-scrub a lager. It's pretty easy. Slowly push CO2 down the liquid dip tube (5-7 PSI or so) while the keg lid's PRV is open. A 15-20 second "shot" on two consecutive days usually does the trick. It stirs up any settled yeast though.

This also works in a pinch, and I recommend it for someone who has a sulfury keg of beer and needs it cleaned up pronto, like for serving today (and not for long term storage):

- Straighten a 25” piece of 3/8” OD copper refrigeration coil and sanitize it.
- Slowly stir the beer for about two minutes and smell, repeating if needed
 
Lager it

I brew a lot of lagers and I always notice a big improvement in flavor smoothness over the course of 4 weeks at cold temps.

The flavor change is subtle, so no it won't turn a bad beer into a good beer, but it will be a small improvement on a good beer. Can you drink a lager right away without the lagering process? Sure, and it will still probably taste great and some might even prefer it, but to my taste they always improve after the lagering
 
i think i actually like a hoppy pils better when it is very fresh, hazy and yeasty as friarsmith said. i’m more of an IPA guy than a lager guy though
 
Wow; great input from multiple angles - exactly what I was looking for. The Helles is still sitting in my unitank on glycol at 37 F as I ride the fence here. Quick note on my thinking process; my first hefe was decocted in a traditional manner, mashed in for a short ferulic acid rest at 113 F followed by a single decoction raising it to 149 F, and I chose to ferment cold at 60 F. Came out exactly as I had anticipated - clean with a good balance, and subtle hints of clove and banana. Did I need to decoct? Probably not, but from what I found in my research; that is how it was (and sometimes still is) done so that is how I did it the first time - no surprises expected or received.

For this first lager, I certainly have the ability to lager it properly, and I do have the patience to wait it out. My IPAs really come in to what I perceive as their peak around 3 weeks into serving, so something positive certainly happens during that 3 weeks in the keg. I have to believe the same applies for a lager. Improved smoothness, integration, cleaning up, etc.

I'll likely keg it off today, place the keg in my old fermeezer set to 33 F and just let it sit for a few weeks while I work on freeing up a tap in the kegerator. Then I'll carefully transfer the keg over to my kegerator, put it on CO2 and let it carb up for another week or so before bringing on line. That would constitute almost 5 weeks
 
Back
Top