Too Long in Secondary Fermentation?

[FireHoseBrewing]

Is there such thing as too long in secondary for a porter? I had my smoked porter in the carboy for at least 3.5 months. It's extract with steeped grains to mimick Alaskan Smoked Porter.
I believe this extra time in carboy has helped the beer not hurt it. It tasted great when I sampled while bottling. Even seemed to have a hint of carbonation.
I haven't seen anything that talks about leaving it too long, most people want to rush it and are hoping that 2 weeks are long enough to get it to the bottle. (myself included) Searched for this several times over the last 3 months, pretty much every weekend when I told myself I would get this brew in the bottles. I didn't really do this aging on purpose, I just had a lot of stuff come up that took priority over bottling.
So did I do some good aging or did I somehow mess up the true flavor by leaving it too long? And since it was in secondary so long does that mean I can bottle condition for a shorter time?

Any feedback would be appreciated

 

[chromados]

No, 3.5 months is not too long. I have had a RIS on oak cubes in a secondary for over a year before and it turned out fantastic. You did a good thing and your patience will pay off when you start to drink them. You will still have to wait the normal 3-4 weeks for it to carbonate but it should be good to drink soon after but time in the bottle will never hurt.

Chromados

 

[FireHoseBrewing]

Thanks for the response. Wow a full year, that is some commitment.
Patience is good, laziness is great. See mom I told you it was good to put stuff off.
Even before I started brewing I always laughed at the Bud "born on date" Does fresh from the mega-brewery really mean good beer?

 

[samc]

Everyone has a different take on this. Beers change over time, some drastically and others more subtle. Hoppier beers seem to be better consumed young, I'd agree that a Porter is better aged somewhat. BUT, I have a great example of a black stout that had all sorts of interesting tastes going on when it was young and now it has aged/matured into a fine beer that is closer to "traditional". I actually preferred the younger pints.

Point is it only matters what you like best.

 

[xeerohour]

Echoing samc's point - it really depends on the beer. Basic pointers I've found is the stronger the beer, the better it ages and many months can really create a smooth beer out of something that used to be too bold. Alternatively, a weak or hoppy beer is usually at it's best within the first few months. But, with that said, I always keep a handful of bottles back from each of my batches, and try one every six months to a year just to see how they change. I highly recommend you do the same and see what you like.

 

[sccrgolee]

so if you do a longer fermentation (a year or so), the yeast is probably going to be dead....should i add more yeast before i bottle to guarantee that there's yeast to carbonate the sugar? if so, when do i add the yeast? won't that leave yeast sediment in the bottle when you drink it? does kegging the beer eliminate this problem because no yeast is needed to carb?

thanks for the help...i have a bourbon barrel ale that's been in the fermenter for about 10 months becuase all the reviews said it tasted better after aging and i'm about to bottle it, but i've had some issues with the last few batches when i bottled. the first was way overcarbonated (i used exactly what was provided) and the second was way undercarbonated (i tried to use less sugar and overcorrected).

 

[syd138]

I have had a Barleywine in the secondary for about 4 months now. Even in the secondary there is a good inch of yeast cake sitting on the bottom.

Even still, I tried some the other day and it was fine.

I don't think it matters how long you keep it in there just as long as you add a bit of yeast when you bottle it.

I'm bottling my barleywine tomorrow and am planning on adding half a pack of t-58. I'm not sure if you need to if you keg.. I've never kegged before so I couldn't tell you.