Trust Your Airlock

[janzik]

You get a "feel" for completeness of fermentation? A rare gift indeed.

Perhaps I am too new to the process to understand that way of thinking. I mean, I get a "feel" for when I should be taking a hydrometer reading but i don't think we are talking about the same thing here.

He's The Yeast Whisperer(tm).

 

[sundowner]

You get a "feel" for completeness of fermentation? A rare gift indeed.

Perhaps I am too new to the process to understand that way of thinking.

Perhaps so, but yes, you can get a feel for it. After 400+ batches of beer, if I haven't learned something, that would make me pretty dumb...and I may be a little dumb, but I'm not plumb dumb.

 

[flyangler18]

You get a "feel" for completeness of fermentation? A rare gift indeed.

See my comments here:

By way of example: my Mild is constantly on tap at the house, and as such, I often have a batch 'in process'. I've brewed this recipe enough times using the same yeast or by introducing a single variable that I can tell from experience that two weeks from pitching and it is ready to go, on the button for calculated FG. If I'm experimenting with a new strain, out comes the hydrometer to log the ferment. I test my intuition from time to time using the hydrometer, but I can recognize completeness by visually inspecting the beer in the carboy. I don't use an airlock except in rare circumstances.

Now, before everyone gets their knickers in a twist, please note that this is a recipe that I've brewed countless times since I developed it, and it is a staple coming out of my brewery. I know what to expect with the ferment under my normal fermentation schedule/temperature, etc. I have that familiarity with the yeast, the recipe, the ferment conditions. To keep myself honest, I break out the hydrometer occasionally to verify my intuition.

I'm a firm believer in using the tools at my disposal in making the best beer that I can, but excessive hydrometer use isn't helping a thing, ya dig?

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

I think the 'don't trust an airlock' sentiment is way, way overstated. I have always gone by the airlock. I do take a hydro sample...as I'm racking. But I've never needed to take a gravity sample while it's still in the fermenter...ever. I've taken a grand total of one hydro sample from a fementer and that was shortly after I joined here (lots of others were doing it so I tried it and wondered; "WTF am I doing this for? I KNOW it's done.").

I can understand telling noobs to not go by the airlock but once you've brewed a few batches you learn how it all works. Then you can choose whether or not to use it.

If I can tell if how a fermentation is coming along just by looking at it (not just the airlock...the krausen, turbidity, clarity, etc.) then so can just about anybody. If not, then perhaps it's a case where a person becomes oblivious to the most obvious things simply because they have a tool for telling them. Like if a cook always used a meat thermometer for telling if steaks are done...that cook may not be able to tell just by pressing on it with their finger (and lol @ that cook!).

 

[sundowner]

He's The Yeast Whisperer(tm).

Which one of us is "The Yeast Whisperer"..? Please pick me, I like the name.

 

[DeathBrewer]

I think one point we should drive home here is that this is not good recommendation for newcomers or specialty beers.

Using the airlock as an indicator will work fine for tried and tested batches, high pitching rates, smaller beers, optimal conditions, etc. but as soon as someone makes a belgian triple, a large weizenbock, or simply is making a beer with "old" yeast, it changes everything.

Telling someone that using the airlock is an acceptable method of fermentation indication is simply bad advice. Yes, it can be done, but no, it WILL NOT tell you where your beer is at.

YOU might know it's done because you've "done it dozens of times" or YOU have optimal conditions, but that doesn't mean it will work every time for every person for every beer.

There is only one sure way to see where your beer is at. Take a sample, take a reading and take a taste.

 

[AnOldUR]

Telling someone that using the airlock is an acceptable method of fermentation indication is simply bad advice.

You are correct, but telling some that the airlock is a useless tool is also bad advice. From the beginning it's been said here that they both have their place in brewing. One compliments the other. And neither should be ignored.

 

[carbon111]

...telling some that the airlock is a useless tool is also bad advice.

But telling someone not to trust the airlock is good advice IMO.

 

[DeathBrewer]

Sure, but the airlock was made for the sole purpose allowing gas to leave the fermentation container. It works great for that purpose. IMO, it should never be used as an indicator of fermentation.

If you know that fermentation is complete because your airlock has stopped, you are taking other things into consideration. You know it has been long enough, you know you pitched enough yeast, you know the temperature was correct, you know possibly because of your experience and the original gravity, etc.

Sure, you can judge your fermentation based on your airlock activity, but it will never be a proper alternative to taking a sample.

 

[AnOldUR]

Is this really as traumatic as you or I are making it sound? No, but to say that I'm looking for an excuse to take readings (potentially infecting my beer) is just silly.

No, it’s not traumatic, just an observation. What’s silly is denying the value of a very basic tool. The hydrometer has a place in the brewing process. The quote you referenced states that. But there is in no real excuse to take a reading when it’s not necessary. If you don’t see airlock activity for 5 days, sure, take a reading. Sure, you want to check a wheat beer before a IIPA. But if your conditions are stable for that IIPA and you still have bubbles after two weeks, it’s not done. Put the hydrometer away and show some patience!

What if I'm using harvested yeast and I don't realize it's pooping out until I've made another batch? I can know in 7-10 days, rather than waiting 30-45 days.

So, you pitched this harvested yeast without making a starter to verify it being viable, there was no airlock activity and no krausen in your fermenter and it took you 7-10 days to figure that there was something wrong by taking a hydrometer reading? Now who's being silly? :cross:

I agree with Revvy's side of the "debate", but I don't think it needs to be as tragic as it sounds.

Not saying it’s tragic, just trying to show that Revvy’s word isn’t always gospel.

 

[DeathBrewer]

But telling someone not to trust the airlock is good advice IMO.

And telling them that they can rely soley on it is bad advice.

Of course, lots of bad advice is regularly given. Like the idea that your beer is automatically done after 7 days and ready to rack to secondary. I've known many people that have had sweet, underattenuated beers due to racking too early.

Come to think of it, some of these people were using their airlock as an indicator.

 

[AnOldUR]

Sure, but the airlock was made for the sole purpose allowing gas to leave the fermentation container. It works great for that purpose. IMO, it should never be used as an indicator of fermentation.

And Viagra was orginally developed as a heart medication . . .

 

[DeathBrewer]

Not saying it’s tragic, just trying to show that Revvy’s word isn’t always gospel.

Is that what you're doing here? Because this thread seems pretty silly...I'm just glad it's not in the beginner's section confusing the newbies.

From what I've seen, Revvy gives pretty sound advice. NO ONE should take anyone's word in regards to brewing as absolute truth. We all have our own paths to brewing and our own inevitable methods that work for what we need.

I'm sure many people would think my stovetop threads are silly...hell, I've learned a lot from the questions people asked within them.

 

[DeathBrewer]

And Viagra was orginally developed as a heart medication . . .

lol, I'm fine with saying that "yes, airlocks can give you indication of fermentation"

But an airlock will NEVER tell you when fermentation is complete. You can ASSUME based on the airlock, but that doesn't mean jack without other information (or experience.)

 

[Orfy]

It's about risk assessment.
I know the risks, I know that risk is minimal based on past experience and I know the out come if it goes wrong.

I generally do not use the hydro after taking the OG.
If you do not have experience and confidence you should.

That being said the majority of brewers would think that my way of brewing is foolish.
I would not recommend it for the newer brewer.

 

[AnOldUR]

But telling someone not to trust the airlock is good advice IMO.

Good for what? You should tell them the limitations of the information that you get from it and where to go next. It can be trusted 100% if you understand what it's telling you.

 

[PseudoChef]

Which one of us is "The Yeast Whisperer"..? Please pick me, I like the name.

Shea Comfort is already The Yeast Whisperer.

 

[AnOldUR]

...I'm just glad it's not in the beginner's section confusing the newbies.

So, you have beginners, with questionable sanitation, taking multiple hydrometer reading when patience and simple observation would serve them better. I think having all the information would be in their best interest.

 

[sundowner]

Shea Comfort is already The Yeast Whisperer.

Drat!

I was kidding...

 

[janzik]

No, it’s not traumatic, just an observation. What’s silly is denying the value of a very basic tool. The hydrometer has a place in the brewing process. The quote you referenced states that. But there is in no real excuse to take a reading when it’s not necessary. If you don’t see airlock activity for 5 days, sure, take a reading. Sure, you want to check a wheat beer before a IIPA. But if your conditions are stable for that IIPA and you still have bubbles after two weeks, it’s not done. Put the hydrometer away and show some patience!

If you mean basic tool by me going down to the basement and seeing if I still see the airlock bubbling I don't progress to the next step, sure. But, my next step after seeing or not seeing airlock activity is take into account what day it is after my brew day and whether or not the krausen has dropped. Since I make a starter for every (non dry yeast) batch, I have activity in less than 8 hours in most cases, I'm usually only looking to go to the next step after 10 days. If I don't see airlock activity AND the krausen has dropped, THEN I take a hydrometer reading to see what happened. I don't say awh shucks, it's not bubbling, time to rack to my secondary. It really is just an afterthought. I can't remember the last time I had a problem, but why not check? My whole point was that I don't use the hydrometer test as an excuse to play dress up. I'm doing it because it's one of the steps in *MY* process. Is it the right way? It's the right way for me, and I'd venture a guess for a bunch of people in some closely varied way.

So, you pitched this harvested yeast without making a starter to verify it being viable, there was no airlock activity and no krausen in your fermenter and it took you 7-10 days to figure that there was something wrong by taking a hydrometer reading? Now who's being silly? :cross:

I never said I don't make starters. For example, I used a June dated vial of WLP001. I made a 2L starter ~48 hours before I pitched. I had minimal activity, but I knew it was doing it's thing in the starter. I had my brew day scheduled for when I did and I wasn't going to change that day. That batch had activity in less than 6 hours. Does that mean it's going to finish where I want or hope it to? That's why I check it, so if I have another old ass vial, I may reconsider what I do with it.

Not saying it’s tragic, just trying to show that Revvy’s word isn’t always gospel.

I do believe there is a strange amount of hero worship on this board compared to other forums. Some people, like Revvy have earned the respect of fellow board members (including myself), but I don't think he and other respected members shouldn't be questioned. I just don't agree with your methods or reason (ie: "just trying to show...."). That sounds malicious. Debate the point and you and Revvy (and myself) can agree to disagree.

 

[DeathBrewer]

How about I encourage them to gain ALL the information possible, which would include his or her specific gravity.

What you're offering is a minimalist approach and eluding to the fact that people do not need to use an airlock. I think people DO need to use an airlock until they are very comfortable with their process or they could end up with crap and not know why.

And I never said that multiple hydrometer readings were necessary. I'm saying that when they think the beer is done (time, airlock, whatever) they should take a sample to ENSURE it is done.

My problem is not with your concept, it's with your delivery. You're making it sound like an airlock is just as good as an hydrometer when it comes to knowing your fermentation is complete. Not true.

 

[Parker36]

So we need a closed system of 1) constant temp (even when accounting for the exothermic reactions taking place); 2)Completely sealed fermentation vessel; and 3) constant atmospheric pressure (which you failed to mention) in order to go strictly by the airlock.

No thanks, I will continue to use my airlock as a relative indicator of fermentation speed/activity, but primarily as a gas release valve and rely on my hydrometer for accurate measure of fermentation.

 

[DeathBrewer]

constant atmospheric pressure

I forgot about that, as it is not a real problem in my area. Change in pressure could definitely make it appear to have fermentation when it is complete, or could result in suckback. Good point.

 

[janzik]

So, you have beginners, with questionable sanitation, taking multiple hydrometer reading when patience and simple observation would serve them better. I think having all the information would be in their best interest.

Why would you say that a noob would have questionable sanitation? When I first started I remember the ridiculous rituals I would follow to make sure everything was clean and sanitized. Why does experience bring someone the sudden notion of cleanliness?

If you do have a dirty noob, then they'll learn real quick when they eventually get that lovely white layer of fungal love in their fermenter. So maybe it would serve them well.

 

[DeathBrewer]

Didn't someone once say that the three most important parts of homebrewing are sanitation, sanitation and sanitation?

 

[chumprock]

Someone has definately got a chip on their shoulder in this thread, and I don't quite get it.

One thing I learned when I picked this hobby up again a couple years ago, there's many different ways of achieving the same goal (beer), and there is no one specific way to do anything.

I am very precise with my measurements and controls, and I make good beer.
My friend is very lazy, ballparks temps, doesn't take hydro readings, and sanitizes with bleach. He also makes good beer. (really good, actually)

To each their own I guess.

I think this thread belongs in Debate forum, not Brew Science..

 

[carbon111]

Good for what? You should tell them the limitations of the information that you get from it and where to go next.

Who pissed in your porridge?

It can be trusted 100% if you understand what it's telling you.

It's telling you that gas is leaving your fermenter and that's about it...It won't tell you if your fermentation is done.

 

[ThickHead]

See my comments here:



Now, before everyone gets their knickers in a twist, please note that this is a recipe that I've brewed countless times since I developed it, and it is a staple coming out of my brewery. I know what to expect with the ferment under my normal fermentation schedule/temperature, etc. I have that familiarity with the yeast, the recipe, the ferment conditions. To keep myself honest, I break out the hydrometer occasionally to verify my intuition.

I'm a firm believer in using the tools at my disposal in making the best beer that I can, but excessive hydrometer use isn't helping a thing, ya dig?

All well and good brother, and I "dig." But there is a stark difference in relation to the case in which you described and Clayton's statement, on which i commented. My "rare gift" comment was based on his protocol of his "almost never" using a hydrometer. But perhaps I am only assuming the case is different and Clayton brews the same beer, with the same ingredients, under the same conditions everytime. I'll stick with playing with my hydrometer. :cross:

 

[AnOldUR]

My problem is not with your concept, it's with your delivery. You're making it sound like an airlock is just as good as an hydrometer when it comes to knowing your fermentation is complete. Not true.

I think you’ve misunderstood my original post. From the beginning I’ve promoted taking hydrometer readings at the appropriate time. I even said that after airlock activity and patience had run their course that a reading should be taken, but that after this another should not be necessary. I don’t see this as being "minimalist."

May be if the title of the thread was don’t NOT trust your airlock there wouldn’t be so many posts taking the intent wrong. That intent was to not disregard the information that your airlock has to offer. That under ideal condition an airlock trustworthy, but you have to understand it's limitations within you system. And finally that to disregard it to the point of saying it's only use is a vent is foolish.




But yes, I do believe that someone starting the prescribed method of taking three consecutive reading after 7-10 days is excessive and unnecessary for most beers. But that's just me.

 

[AnOldUR]

My "rare gift" comment was based on his protocol of his "almost never" using a hydrometer.

Please link to who are you quoting here. I missed something. Thanks.