Yet another secondary fermenter question

[yourlastchance89]

When is it best to use secondary fermentation if at all? Everything I've heard from more senior brewers always recommend racking to a secondary for at least some reason. I know doing primary only has gained quite a bit of popularity, with most brewers seeming to do a mix of the two; only using primary fermentation, with some exceptions to certain brews.
To add to this, the beer I'm currently brewing is an older dated recipe for an old ale(5.5 gallons). It calls for racking to a secondary after 5-6 days, and adding creme de cacao to the secondary. It doesn't specify what kind and at the liquor store they ranged from 15%-25% abv, some utilized different liquor sources as a base(rum or vodka), and I wasn't sure which were dairy free. I went with Godiva white chocolate liqueur due to a lower 15% abv. It's listed as dairy free on the official site (0g of fat for macros as well), and it is described to have some vanilla flavor, which the beer recipe says should hint out when tasting as a result of the creme de cacao ultimately when the beer is done. I am just keeping everything in my primary the whole time(3 weeks). I read somewhere you should rack to a secondary if it is over a certain alcohol percentage. My OG was 1.062(recipe called for 1.063), gravity today was 1.012. It estimates it should be 8.3%abv when finished, although I'm completely unsure of how to figure out what mine will be after adding 750ml of liquer at 15%abv to 5.5 gallons, considering additionally I have no idea how many grams of sugar and/or carbs. For everyone out there, if you do rack to secondary, when and why do you do it? Also if you do, do you have any links to studies or data to support your reasoning?

 

[brandonlovesbeer]

As I'm sure you've read multiple times.
The only time you really NEED to do a secondary is
1) if you are planning to do extended aging.
2) if you are adding fruit or other additions such as that.
3) if you are aging on oak.

But for settling times of most homebrew batches of typically 1 month, a secondary is not necessary.

 

[yourlastchance89]

As I'm sure you've read multiple times.
The only time you really NEED to do a secondary is
1) if you are planning to do extended aging.
2) if you are adding fruit or other additions such as that.
3) if you are aging on oak.

But for settling times of most homebrew batches of typically 1 month, a secondary is not necessary.

What is the logic behind fruit additions? I've heard of people doing this, but I have also heard the other camp as well. I assume it is the restarting of fermentation from the sugar. My concern is the sugar in the liqueur essentially equates to the same result as sugar from fruit. Given that, what is/are the difference(s) to restarted fermentation in the primary with sugared additions, versus the secondary. And is there any kind of objective evidence to support either claim?

 

[yourlastchance89]

Here's the macros on MyFitnessPal if I convert the 750 ml to 25.3 fl oz.

View attachment 1486253550655.jpg

 

[yourlastchance89]

Looking for experiments like this.
http://homebrewacademy.com/experimental-dry-hop-technique/

 

[C-Rider]

As I'm sure you've read multiple times.
The only time you really NEED to do a secondary is
1) if you are planning to do extended aging. More than a month or two
2) if you are adding fruit or other additions such as that.
3) if you are aging on oak.

But for settling times of most homebrew batches of typically 1 month, a secondary is not necessary.

I second this.

 

[brandonlovesbeer]

What is the logic behind fruit additions? I've heard of people doing this, but I have also heard the other camp as well. I assume it is the restarting of fermentation from the sugar. My concern is the sugar in the liqueur essentially equates to the same result as sugar from fruit. Given that, what is/are the difference(s) to restarted fermentation in the primary with sugared additions, versus the secondary. And is there any kind of objective evidence to support either claim?

The idea is not to add more sugars, it's to add the flavor of the fruit. Further fermentation, at least from what I understand, is more just a side effect of the process and not the intended result.

I have no experience with this because I hate this style of beer (fruits beers). So I'm not the best one to answer this part of the question.

 

[brandonlovesbeer]

What is the logic behind fruit additions? I've heard of people doing this, but I have also heard the other camp as well. I assume it is the restarting of fermentation from the sugar. My concern is the sugar in the liqueur essentially equates to the same result as sugar from fruit. Given that, what is/are the difference(s) to restarted fermentation in the primary with sugared additions, versus the secondary. And is there any kind of objective evidence to support either claim?

The idea is not to add more sugars, it's to add the flavor of the fruit. Further fermentation, at least from what I understand, is more just a side effect of the process and not the intended result.

I have no experience with this because I hate this style of beer (fruits beers). So I'm not the best one to answer this part of the question.

 

[yourlastchance89]

The idea is not to add more sugars, it's to add the flavor of the fruit. Further fermentation, at least from what I understand, is more just a side effect of the process and not the intended result.

I have no experience with this because I hate this style of beer (fruits beers). So I'm not the best one to answer this part of the question.

I understood that adding fruit reboots fermentation. When done in the primary with the original trub present, a more aggressive fermentation results, and you will get less taste and aroma of the desired fruit. Found only one good thread on here of someone doing this. They did 3 weeks in the primary, thought the fruit didn't taste strong enough and it was bland, dumped it without even bottling, and went through the entire recipe again twice utilizing a second fermenter both final times.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=220392
The same logic as fruit I think would apply to my creme de cacao addition, as the recipe states it should "gain a very unique vanilla-ish personality from the late addition of the creme de cacao". I've just been unable to find anyone testing or experimenting a sugared addition being added to the primary vs. the secondary