To Secondary or Not? John Palmer and Jamil Zainasheff Weigh In

[mklawz]

In my opinion too. This man makes great beer. Actually, he's the best homebrewer I know.

FWIW, proud secondary user here. Always was, always will be. The way I see it, it's just another tool in producing tasty, clear beer. A tool - nothing more, nothing less.

I will just say that I use a secondary for every beer that is not a wheat. 2 or 3 weeks in primary and one week in secondary on gelatin and polyclar. Any dry hopping is done in the secondary with polyclar and gelatin and pellets.

I seem to always get some haze if I don't use a secondary. It's bothersome that people chest thump and declare 27 weeks in primary MAKES BETTER BEER.

I have 9 ribbons in the last year (including 1st place HBT Hefe out of 28 beers) and one Best of Show for an American Lager out of 90 beers. I am not a great brewer like Jamil or Denny but my beers are good, IMO, and I use a secondary.

 

[Starderup]

I will just say that I use a secondary for every beer that is not a wheat. 2 or 3 weeks in primary and one week in secondary on gelatin and polyclar. Any dry hopping is done in the secondary with polyclar and gelatin and pellets.

I seem to always get some haze if I don't use a secondary. It's bothersome that people chest thump and declare 27 weeks in primary MAKES BETTER BEER.

I have 9 ribbons in the last year (including 1st place HBT Hefe out of 28 beers) and one Best of Show for an American Lager out of 90 beers. I am not a great brewer like Jamil or Denny but my beers are good, IMO, and I use a secondary.

No chest thumping, and I wouldn't try 27 weeks in a primary, but I will just say that 4-6 weeks is giving me very, very clear beers with clean finishes, and it is less work. Whatever works for you.

 

[discgolfin]

I simply use secondary to dry hop and for big beers. I have only 4 6 gallon and 1 6.5 gallon primary..but 5 5 gallon secondary so I always like to move them to make room to brew again. I have left them in primary up to 3 months with no problem..I also have moved them to secondary after only 10 days with no problem..The key is good fermentation..the yeast will clean up after fermentation in only a few days..than its all about clearing//so primary or secondary the same to me for clearing..

The one time I had a problem in Primary was with stressed out washed yeast..never again..that was a mistake..live and learn

J

 

[dirty_martini]

I use secondary less and less...only for beers I want really clear. I dont even dryhop in secondary. I just let fermentation finish, then throw the dry hops in. Main reason is because its hard to get the dry hops in and out of a carboy...but in a bucket its easy. Dark beers dont need a secondary.

However, if Im making something light colored and belgian that isnt a wit, i usually secondary. If Im making something that requires some aging (barleywine, sour, impy stout) ill secondary.

I think ultimately secondary is all about what your goal is. It isnt necessary...but can be helpful.

 

[piteko]

If the trick is to not use your calendar as a schedule for primary-to-secondary transfer, how can you get a gravity reading without opening the primary bucket and releasing that CO2? Isn't the whole point to keep that CO2 blanket there until you're ready to move to secondary?

If you are using a bucket, you can drill a hole near the base and insert a plastic faucet:

My first beer I just used the airlock as the guide, when it slowed, a lot, I transferred. But I did it before it finished fermentation.

Any advice for my next batch based upon my techniques?

I suggest not to rely on the airlock: one of my buckets is not airtight, so I the airlock is moving only during the top of the fermentation. Take a density measure, especially if you are going to bottle: if you have an incomplete fermentation, you are bottling unfermented sugars > you have more priming than what you're thinking > the bottles could explode.

By the way, very interesting thread. I'm on my first IPA and I always used secondary. This time I'll take a shot on primary only.
Cheers from Italy
Piteko

 

[robertbartsch]

I just racked 3 beers to kegs and each had been in the primary for 5 weeks. The beers are very clear compared to similar beers I fermented in primaries for less time. I have not tasted these yet, but they seem to smell less "green."

My question is this. If you tend to brew large beers (6-8%) do they benefit more from longer primaries? It seems longer primaries are one form of conditioning longer and larger beers tend to need more time to condition; right?

 

[knightbeer39]

I'm a secondary man for sure. Clears up the beer, easier to siphon off without a lot of yeast into kegs. It's always worked for me and I see no reason to change. I actually like to transfer, gives me a chance to taste the brew and take a reading, etc.

 

[Bob]

If you're using "taking a reading" as a reason to transfer, as the kids today say, "UR DOIN IT RONG". The point of taking a series of readings is to ensure that it's the right time to transfer. In other words, you shouldn't be transferring until you get at least two readings recorded.

Moving on.

For the record, I've done both. I admit to using secondaries. Often. For me, it's a clarity issue, unless I use a yeast with a very high sedimentation characteristic. So I rack and fine. I don't usually rack dark beers - Porters and Stouts and such - nor do I rack beers where I don't care about clarity - like wheat beers of any type.

My "house" English strains, S-04 and Ringwood, flocculate very well and rarely require fining, so I rarely secondary them. My "house" American strain, S-05, is much less flocculent, so I always rack to secondary and fine. My "house" Belgian yeast (Wyeast Ardennes [3522]) is another high flocking yeast, so no secondaries unless I plan to bulk age for months. So much of my decision depends on what I'm brewing and what yeast I choose.

It's not about "MY WAY IS BETTER". It's about experimenting with what works best in a given situation in your brewery. Sometimes that might mean transferring to secondary. Other times it might mean leaving the beer in primary until it's packaged. To swear off one or the other is crippling yourself for no good reason. It's like refusing to put a sand wedge and other clubs in your bag. Why would you do that? It's stupid and really rather petulant.

Cheers,

Bob

 

[Righlander]

LOL if you think doing a month long primary is bad...TRY IT! and you will know. it's the way to go. i have noticed the beers i brew and leave in the primary for 3-4 weeks with no secondary, come out better. got the advice from HBT probably 2 years ago. so if you think it is a scam...then do 2 batches of the same beer ..leave one in the primary until it's done (hydro reading the same for 3 days) then rack to secondary for 2 weeks. and then leave one in the primary for a month. taste and visually test them on your own. i promise you... you will know

 

[mikeysab]

One thing I noticed about this whole thread is that the secondary users seem to be the only ones mentioning clearing agents. It seems they rack to secondary then use gelatin to clear their beers. Does that mean that the "primary only" crowd isn't using any clearing agents, like IM, or whirfloc? Do their beers just clear on their own with the extended time in primary? From what I've read on the threads about clearing agents, IM, or whirfloc does it's magic in primary, and clears the beer very well.

I've never used any clearing agents, and I've had clear beers. On the other hand, I've had hazy beers as well. I have always primaried for a month, but I've only been brewing for 13 months. On my next brew, I'm planning on using whirfloc to get my American Amber to clear up nice.

 

[hal2814]

One thing I noticed about this whole thread is that the secondary users seem to be the only ones mentioning clearing agents. It seems they rack to secondary then use gelatin to clear their beers. Does that mean that the "primary only" crowd isn't using any clearing agents, like IM, or whirfloc? Do their beers just clear on their own with the extended time in primary? From what I've read on the threads about clearing agents, IM, or whirfloc does it's magic in primary, and clears the beer very well.

I've never used any clearing agents, and I've had clear beers. On the other hand, I've had hazy beers as well. I have always primaried for a month, but I've only been brewing for 13 months. On my next brew, I'm planning on using whirfloc to get my American Amber to clear up nice.

When I don't do a secondary and I'm not washing the yeast, I add gelatin to the primary bucket a few days before racking. If I do plan to wash the yeast, I add gelatin as I rack to the serving keg.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

One thing I noticed about this whole thread is that the secondary users seem to be the only ones mentioning clearing agents. It seems they rack to secondary then use gelatin to clear their beers. Does that mean that the "primary only" crowd isn't using any clearing agents, like IM, or whirfloc? Do their beers just clear on their own with the extended time in primary? From what I've read on the threads about clearing agents, IM, or whirfloc does it's magic in primary, and clears the beer very well.

I've never used any clearing agents, and I've had clear beers. On the other hand, I've had hazy beers as well. I have always primaried for a month, but I've only been brewing for 13 months. On my next brew, I'm planning on using whirfloc to get my American Amber to clear up nice.

90+% of the time I use only Whirlfloc/Irish Moss in the kettle. I think most people do and when I hear of finings/clearing agents I usually think of gelatin/isinglass/polyclar/etc.

There's a couple of pics of my clearer beers in this thread in post #44 on page 5 and #78 on page 8. Both sat in a keg for a good long time before being bottled so that's kind of like a secondary, but no finings/agents other than Whirlfloc.

 

[baer19d]

I know it has been said above that it's necessary to transfer the beer to a secondary for specialty beer additions i.e. pumpkin, oak. etc. but I still have one simple question about using a secondary, would it be necessary to transfer a spiced winter ale to a secondary in order to add some mulling spice or could I just throw it in the primary? I'm assuming that it will be since it's an addition.
Thanks, Mike

 

[nilo]

Although I agree that leaving the beer in the primary for weeks doesn't add anything bad per say, I'm wondering on how much it really help.
I know people say that the yeast will clean after thenselves and all that, but it seems to me that the yeast cake is down there, compacked and not really doing much to improve anything. I would think that the small amount of yeast yet in suspension would the heroes still working in your beer. So that said, racking of the yeast cake or even botlling would do the same thing.
I have always bottled few days after fermentation has finished and always had good beer. Perhaps I would have great beer by leaving on the yeast? I would have to to a batch, split and make a comparison I guess. Had anyone actually done that?

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

I thought the purpose of the article was to say that you don't have rush to rack your fermenting beer to a secondary in order to avoid autolysis, not that there were any benefits other than that. I'm fortunate in that after brewing 40 different recipes I haven't had to do anything other than pitch my yeast, ferment for 21 days and then bottle trub free beer. At the end of the 18th day I allow the temperature of the fermenting beer to rise to 70F over the next 3 days of fermentation. The trub is always tightly compacted in the bottom of the fermenters trub tray and it stays put in the fermenter while bottling.

 

[user 19629]

.......................... Perhaps I would have great beer by leaving on the yeast? I would have to to a batch, split and make a comparison I guess. Had anyone actually done that?

http://www.byo.com/component/resource/article/1960-byo-and-basic-brewing-radio-experiment-does-delayed-racking-harm-your-beer

A quote from the experiment :
"In our experiment, the flavor difference between the trial beers was very subtle and no brewer reported that the beer left on the yeast was marred by excessive off flavors. Leaving the beer on the yeast does, however, change the character slightly. Interestingly, participants were split over whether this improved or detracted from the beer. "

 

[Yankeehillbrewer]

I've done both, as many have, and I personally have better results with using a Secondary. I typically primary for 2 then rack to Secondary for a week and then bottle. For my bigger beers(Barleywine,anything Imperial) I will Primary for month and Secondary for couple months then bottle. I can't taste any differences, the beer is clearer, & it is much easier to rack from Secondary to my Bottling bucket.

Just do whatever blows your hair back

 

[jtkratzer]

For those of you who do most of your beers one way or the other, what are the exceptions to your rule. For those of you who only primary, are there any you secondary most of the time? For those who always secondary, are there any you leave in the primary?

The wheat seems to be unanimous on not using a secondary. Seems a lot of people won't secondary the bigger beers until after a month.

I'm on my first batch right now, a hefeweizen and I'm not going to use a secondary, but should it get 4 weeks in the primary? I know the hefeweizens are typically cloudy beers, so how long should it sit? I'm looking for some suggestions as this is my first batch and I have no reference point to compare it to. I'm looking for some guidelines because I'm certainly not experienced enough to give it the "do whatever you want and hope it turns out well" approach yet. I'd like to get a handle of why/how things happen and brew some decent tasting beers before I start playing around too much without having a clue what I'm doing.

 

[Rick500]

I don't secondary. Exception is when I want to rinse and reuse the yeast, and I'm either dry hopping or adding something else to the fermenter that I don't want to deal with when I rinse the yeast.

 

[jtkratzer]

I don't secondary. Exception is when I want to rinse and reuse the yeast, and I'm either dry hopping or adding something else to the fermenter that I don't want to deal with when I rinse the yeast.

I've read that a couple times here, about rinsing yeast and I don't have a clue about that and I'm probably not ready to even worry about it. I'm in the KISS phase and plan to stay there until I can get something decent to come out of a bottle or keg.

 

[remilard]

http://www.byo.com/component/resource/article/1960-byo-and-basic-brewing-radio-experiment-does-delayed-racking-harm-your-beer

A quote from the experiment :
"In our experiment, the flavor difference between the trial beers was very subtle and no brewer reported that the beer left on the yeast was marred by excessive off flavors. Leaving the beer on the yeast does, however, change the character slightly. Interestingly, participants were split over whether this improved or detracted from the beer. "

Interesting conclusions. Based on what I read, only 1 person could tell the two beers apart blind, and that person identified classic autolysis flavors in the beer that stayed on the yeast longer. Anyway, all these BYO BBR "studies" are crap because there are zero controls and they don't require blind tasting. If you just want to publish what a bunch of people believe, you don't have to brew any beer to do that.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

For those of you who do most of your beers one way or the other, what are the exceptions to your rule. For those of you who only primary, are there any you secondary most of the time? For those who always secondary, are there any you leave in the primary?

The wheat seems to be unanimous on not using a secondary. Seems a lot of people won't secondary the bigger beers until after a month.

I'm on my first batch right now, a hefeweizen and I'm not going to use a secondary, but should it get 4 weeks in the primary? I know the hefeweizens are typically cloudy beers, so how long should it sit? I'm looking for some suggestions as this is my first batch and I have no reference point to compare it to. I'm looking for some guidelines because I'm certainly not experienced enough to give it the "do whatever you want and hope it turns out well" approach yet. I'd like to get a handle of why/how things happen and brew some decent tasting beers before I start playing around too much without having a clue what I'm doing.

jtkratzer, I regularly ferment my ales for 21 days in the primary and I've never had any issues with too much trub in the bottles, including my wheat beers. The key to this approach is to use the right amount of viable yeast for the job and maintain good sanitization and temperature control.

Click for more...Yeast In Your Beer

 

[HopheadNJ]

jtkratzer, I regularly ferment my ales for 21 days in the primary and I've never had any issues with too much trub in the bottles, including my wheat beers. The key to this approach is to use the right amount of viable yeast for the job and maintain good sanitization and temperature control.

Click for more...Yeast In Your Beer

I couldn't agree with this more, plus I cold crash a few days before kegging and friends are asking if I filter my beers.

 

[jtkratzer]

jtkratzer, I regularly ferment my ales for 21 days in the primary and I've never had any issues with too much trub in the bottles, including my wheat beers. The key to this approach is to use the right amount of viable yeast for the job and maintain good sanitization and temperature control.

Click for more...Yeast In Your Beer

When I put the hefeweizen wort into the fermentation bucket, the guy at the LHBS recommended against straining it, so it's in there with all the hop pellet mush and the rest of the trub. I'm wondering if I should secondary it, even for just a few days to make it easier to avoid getting that stuff into the bottles. I know there's supposed to be a decent amount of yeast and what not in with the beer, but not remnants of the hops.

 

[jtkratzer]

I decided to secondary the hefeweizen since I didn't strain any of the hops out for fermentation. I'm give it a few days and see how everything is settling and then bottle it.

EDIT: still not done fermenting, going to have to wait.

 

[mikeysab]

Click for more...Yeast In Your Beer

You guys gotta stop with all this internet trickery. I thought I'd get more yeast in my beer by clicking that link, and that's not even close to what happened.

 

[Revvy]

Someone just posted this in another thread, it is really the most clearest answer I have seen. Even better than his hem and haw in the initial post in this thread.

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.

 

[mikeysab]

JP is on HBT? I had no idea. What about JZ?

 

[Rick500]

JP is on HBT? I had no idea. What about JZ?

Yep, he stops in occasionally.

 

[mikeysab]

What's his username....or is it one of those closely guarded secrets, like what rdwhahb stands for?