# Secondary Or Not?



## Stuster (10/4/06)

Like most people, I started out with one fermenter and didn't rack. I found there was loads of sediment in my bottled beer so after doing some reading I started racking to a secondary. Beers much clearer. Happy brewer.

Then, more reading suggested that there was no need for a secondary with ales, and there wouldn't be too much sediment as long as the beer is left on the yeast for a couple of weeks. Also, seems that the dangers of autolysis has been exaggerated and this length of time on the primary yeast cake is no problem.

I've been doing only primaries for the last few months and it seems to be producing clear, clean beers. It seems others have been using this technique and I was wondering how people have found it.


----------



## Airgead (10/4/06)

I rack, partly for the clarity but also to move my beer from a fermenter (which I only have a couple of) to a jerry can (which I have plenty of) so I can make more beer.

Cheers
Dave


----------



## Beerpig (10/4/06)

Don't rack, have never tried it ................ not planning to at the moment

Maybe I'm just lazy

Cheers


----------



## Jye (10/4/06)

I used to but dont any more, its one less thing I have to do and eliminates the chance of infection and oxidation. I wasnt getting any increase in clarity and I can always run it through a filter if needed.

If I had another fridge I would use secondary for storage.


----------



## Jerry (10/4/06)

Never used to rack but after finding AHB I started doing it. I certainly find the beer is clearer and I think after a week in primary followed by a week in secondary fermentation is well and truely complete.

Cheers
Scott


----------



## normell (10/4/06)

Always rack, and sometimes even filter

Normell


----------



## razz (10/4/06)

G'day Stuster. I always used racked to secondary and put the fermenter in the fridge and slowly manipulated the temp down to cc. Sometime ago I purchased a conical.After primary, removed the sludge and then lowered temp to cc. The difference is there is always some residual sediment in the conical, even during cc. The beer still tastes good.
My point is, worry more about the temp of your fermenter more so than the yeast sediment. The colder the beer is, the clearer it will be.

John :chug:


----------



## Ross (10/4/06)

I only rack to a cube if I haven't a spare keg to transfer to - 90% of the time, straight from primary fermenter to keg, via a filter. Whether it be lagers or ales I find they condition better once carbonated. Once there's a spare tap, it goes straight on :chug: 

cheers Ross...


----------



## Malnourished (10/4/06)

Ross said:


> filter





normell said:


> filter





Jye said:


> filter



I had no idea so many homebrewers filtered. But the question is, why?


----------



## Ross (10/4/06)

Malnourished said:


> I had no idea so many homebrewers filtered. What do you gain from it? Just clarity?
> [post="119484"][/post]​



Clarity, taste & a less active bowel  to name 3... also means I can take kegs to party's etc without the worry of stirring up settled yeast.

If your beer is hazy, how do you know if you have a protien problem or just suspended yeast.? Protien haze can have a dramatic effect on the shelf life of your beer. Not a problem if you drink it within a week, but I have some on tap for quite a while.

But at the end of the day it's personal choice & I get a lot of pleasure holding my glass to the light & seeing a perfect pint. Going by comments made by many visitors to my little drinking hole here, it's an opinion shared by many...

cheers Ross...


----------



## muga (10/4/06)

When I first started brewing I didn't rack, was getting cloudy beers and I wanted to make a clear one and I did a search on it and that is how I came across AHB and since then I have always racked and get great results.

I don't see the need for a filter as the results have always been good, and even better after cold conditioning.


----------



## Malnourished (11/4/06)

Ross said:


> If your beer is hazy, how do you know if you have a protien problem or just suspended yeast.? Protien haze can have a dramatic effect on the shelf life of your beer. Not a problem if you drink it within a week, but I have some on tap for quite a while.
> [post="119490"][/post]​


Thanks for the reply. Obviously it's a case of each to his own (such is the advantage of homebrewing,) but there's just no way I'd ever filter my beer (sorry, just had to throw that in there.  ) But I digress...

I'm interested in what you say above, though. What kind of time frames are we talking here? Have you ever done a side-by-side comparison? My point is that I can see the advantage of filtering to a commercial operation who can't control the handling of the product once it's out the front gate, but we have way more control over the handling of our own beers.

And what size filter are you using? From what I've read it seems like you need to be one micron or less to get most of the protein, at which point you are (potentially/allegedly/etc.) compromising body and mouthfeel.


----------



## Asher (11/4/06)

There's no option for people who have never done it, and don't intend to start doing it....
I'm with Dr Chris White on this one

Asher for now


----------



## Gough (11/4/06)

That was fairly cryptic Asher... What did Dr Chris White have to say for those of us that weren't lucky enough to hear/read his thoughts?  

Shawn. (The happy secondary using, non-filtering homebrewer...)


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/4/06)

Hey! I love my filter... 12 Months old and still in the wrapper. It's not suffering from depreciation ATM. :lol: 

Warren -


----------



## Steve (11/4/06)

7 days primary and 7 days secondary for me (ales, that is). :beer: 
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Steve (11/4/06)

p.s. reason: clearer beer and I ALWAYS dry hop in secondary
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Ross (11/4/06)

Malnourished said:


> And what size filter are you using? From what I've read it seems like you need to be one micron or less to get most of the protein, at which point you are (potentially/allegedly/etc.) compromising body and mouthfeel.
> [post="119600"][/post]​



I use a 1 micron filter to remove the yeast. This removes most of the yeast leaving a clear beer, but there's enough yeast left (like in a long CC beer) to still prime & bottle if you so desire. The 1 micron will not remove protien haze, I use polyclar for this, but only when necessary. I run the first little bit into a glass from the filter & if still hazy I add the polyclar - 10 minutes later I filter a bright beer.

No loss of beer flavour & certainly doesn't compromise body or mouthfeel. 

If you get served a cloudy ale in Britain, you hand it back - The difference in taste can be quite dramatic - This is not in the imagination, as my local beers were drunk out of a pewter mug & I would invariably know on the first mouthfull if poured a cloudy pint.

Info on polyclar related products & shelf life here. View attachment Polyclar_Products_for_Beer.pdf


Sorry for the thread hijack here, but I guess it's related...

cheers Ross


----------



## Jye (11/4/06)

There is a nice little segment on secondaries in the latest Jamil Show on APAs at 38mins.


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/4/06)

Jye said:


> There is a nice little segment on secondaries in the latest Jamil Show on APAs at 38mins.
> [post="119631"][/post]​



Listening to that ATM coincidentally Jye. The segment is a good insight on APAs.

I think he's a bit of a case of I've got the ribbons so I'm right if you catch my drift. (there's a lot of 'em around). I'm not slagging either method as they'd work.  

My personal take on it is it's yeast strain/flocculation dependant... High floccers straight to the keg/bottle. Low floccers go to the 2ndary for a bit of clearing.  

Warren -


----------



## BennyBrewster (11/4/06)

Ross how much did your filter cost you and do you have to get a new filter element for each keg you filter? or are they reusable?


----------



## Jye (11/4/06)

warrenlw63 said:


> I think he's a bit of a case of I've got the ribbons so I'm right if you catch my drift. (there's a lot of 'em around). I'm not slagging either method as they'd work.
> [post="119632"][/post]​



I see where you are coming from, but as you say he does have the ribbons and his methods are worth trying.


----------



## Jye (11/4/06)

BB, have a read through this thread, heaps of info.


----------



## Trough Lolly (11/4/06)

Jye said:


> warrenlw63 said:
> 
> 
> > I think he's a bit of a case of I've got the ribbons so I'm right if you catch my drift. (there's a lot of 'em around). I'm not slagging either method as they'd work.
> ...



There's a shitload of good brewers out there who've never won a ribbon or entered a beer in a comp... <_< 

TL


----------



## Steve (11/4/06)

awwww thanks for the compliment TL  
Cheers
Steve


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/4/06)

Without the risk of this dragging OT. I stated Jye that I think that his method is wrong and right.  

My aside was that a bunch of ribbons does not necessarily dictate you wrote the book on brewing either. That said he's obviously won them because he's a good or even great brewer OTOH I hope he doesn't narrow his mind to other's opinions (like some).  

TL is quite correct... Plenty of blokes out there making great beer and enjoying it for what it is.  

My theory (and it's only mine) is that secondary fermentation is an option of choice. An example a lowish grav. bitter brewed with a highly flocculent yeast strain can go straight to keg without a worry... An IPA with a powdery strain would most certainly benefit from a secondary fermenter.

Horses for courses. :beerbang: 

Warren


----------



## Jye (11/4/06)

I totally agree with you TL and Warren, I just hope new brewers who see this poll and think they have to secondary give both methods a try and decide for themselves


----------



## Borret (11/4/06)

I thought part of being a newbie was being led a stray by the guy on the forum that doesn't neccesarily know much but is simply making the most noise?


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/4/06)

Borret said:


> I thought part of being a newbie was being led a stray by the guy on the forum that doesn't neccesarily know much but is simply making the most noise?
> [post="119664"][/post]​



Depends on which end of the body the noise comes form Mr. Borrett. :lol: 

Warren -


----------



## RobW (11/4/06)

The Rules of Brewing

Rule No 1:

There are no rules

Rule No 2:

see Rule No 1

or to put it concisely: it depends


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/4/06)

Rule No. 3 Bruce;

Nooooo .......ters. :lol: 

Warren -


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (11/4/06)

Very interesting diverse opinions on this topic. 

I guess I classify as a newbie as I will only have a single pint next to my name. Certainly I am not a long time brewer (Back into HB since July 05) but have managed to produce approximately 1500 stubbies in that time. (Before you ask, yes Id love to have a kegging system but am a little afraid at the prospect of having beer on tap in my house.....  )

Back on topic, it has always been my aim to produce a beautiful crystal clear beer but to date I have neither used secondary or filtered. I have used finings (until i discovered that some contain shelfish products and I feared a guest having one of my brews and never suspecting that their shellfish allergy would ruin a great night....and possibly freindship)

I have heard tell of secondary but as yet have not attempted it.

I have also attempted to leave the brew in the fermenter for a couple of days.
Ultimately I would like to not have to worry about avoiding pouring the sediment. 

Its not so much that I hate the taste of the sediment although I do much prefer to avoid it and cant understand those who say they like it. 

Probably another major reason i would like to remove the sediment is so that I dont waste a cm of beer in each bottle.

This thread has encouraged me to rack (?) my current brew. Iwas given a second fermenter recently. Can I use this as the secondary.

Any pointers or hints?

Lastly in this extended posting.....

May I just add that I haven't had more than a couple of commercial beers since I started brewing and have not had a bad comment from anyone who has had one of my brews.....in fact some have proclaimed it "the best beer I have ever tasted".

Cheers to the home brewers of Australia....
Cheers to the posters on this AHB.....
Cheers to filtering..............
.......................................and goodnight. -_-


----------



## dicko (11/4/06)

AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:


> Very interesting diverse opinions on this topic.
> This thread has encouraged me to rack (?) my current brew. Iwas given a second fermenter recently. Can I use this as the secondary.
> 
> Any pointers or hints?
> ...



Hi ATOMT,
What a handle, but anyway,  

You can use a fermenter as a secondary or cube.
It is good, if after you have cubed or racked your beer to a secondary,
you place the cube in a fridge to stop the yeast from working and help it drop out of suspension. 
I try to leave mine for a minimum of 10 days if I can.

Cheers


----------



## KoNG (12/4/06)

dicko said:


> AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:
> 
> 
> > Very interesting diverse opinions on this topic.
> ...



I rack all my ales (i never really do lagers anyways  ) atleast for a couple of days, i find i get another point or two even when it has stopped in primary.
My point..? Dicko your comment above is a little misleading, especially if newbies are to read this when thinking of moving to racking their beers. The above process may be suitable for keggers (especially if you want to achieve a certain FG). But for bottlers, stopping the fermentation process by chilling.. could very well result in bottle bombs if it leaves extra sugars to be consumed by the yeast when it wakes up after bottling  . 
i would think if racking to secondary and you bottle, you need to be sure fermentation is complete before CC'ing.

Beers
KoNG


----------



## warrenlw63 (12/4/06)

There's relevance there Kong.

I think the whole issue has been clouded by brewer's forgetting to mention their preferred method of dispense.  

You can get away with a lot more when you keg. Particularly forgoeing a secondary or incomplete fermentation. Thanks for clarifying things for a lot of brewers Kong.  

I think bottlers need to be more patient and allow their beers to completely clear and ferment.

Warren -


----------



## Steve (12/4/06)

Angel
Even when you rack to secondary for 7 days or however long you will still have sediment in the bottom of your bottle. The beer maybe clearer but you will still have sediment. I suggest you decant your stubbie/longnecks to a jug and leave the yeast behind in the bottle. Simple.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Trough Lolly (12/4/06)

AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:


> This thread has encouraged me to rack (?) my current brew. Iwas given a second fermenter recently. Can I use this as the secondary.
> 
> Any pointers or hints?
> [post="119709"][/post]​



Sanitation is king...by all means rack to secondary (aka Beer Brightening Tank) but make sure you minimise any risk of infection by having good sanitation procedures - you don't want to waste a good beer by being lazy near the end of the process.

FWIW, I rack pale beers to secondary (and always _lager_ my lagers at 3C in the fridge) but I rarely put amber or darker beer in secondary - they typically go straight from the primary, on about day 14, to the keg. Choosing a quality yeast strain that floccs well helps too!  

Cheers,
TL


----------



## mikem108 (12/4/06)

Always secondary, cleaner beer, cleaner flavours!


----------



## dicko (12/4/06)

KoNG said:


> dicko said:
> 
> 
> > AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:
> ...



Yes KoNG,
You are correct.
You would think that I would learn by now to stop and think before I post. 

I should never assume that all brewers will make certain the fermentation is complete before racking to the conditioning cube  

What I should have said that if angel etc, is racking for clarity it should be racked or cubed only after it is determined that fermentation is complete.
It doesn't matter wether you bottle or keg, or drink it from the fermenter, you should determine by SG readings that fermentation is finished before racking or bottling.
Bottling after you rack and chill is not a problem and as it has been already stated, it will help to produce clearer beers with less sediment and generally a "smoother" taste.

Cheers and clear beers!!


----------



## Fingerlickin_B (12/4/06)

dicko said:


> or drink it from the fermenter



Mmmm, yummo :lol: 

Seriously though...where is the "never" voting selection?

PZ.


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (13/4/06)

Thanks all for your very useful advice. Being a bottler (I do spend a lot of time dreaming of a keg system but usually wake up when the dream gets to the part where I am 150Kg and constantly drunk), I understand the very relevant points about letting the fermentation finish before seriously cooling the brew. In anycase its not an issue for me as I am a basics brewer at this stage....No extra fridge.

A few more Q's

When I come to decanting to secondary for the first time (probably over Easter), I had thought I would do something like the following

Put aside sanitation here. Take it as given that I am very conscientious on this subject. Preparation always includes sometime praying at the temple of the god of sterility.

I use a length of silicon tubing when bottling and I had thought to use this to transfer from my brew from my coopers fermenter to my Brewmaster fermenter(See thread on "What fermenter do you use" for pics).

Questions. 

1 - Am I better to siphon (from top down) or just use the tap?

2 - Should I try to run the beer down the inside wall of the secondary or just run it straight in? i.e. avoid foaming and aeration or just go for it?

Thanks again for all your help.


----------



## Stuster (13/4/06)

Atom

1. Either will work fine. I find syphoning from top leads to less sediment, but really whichever is easy.

2. You do not want to introduce any oxygen into the beer at this stage. You're best off with tubing long enough to go to the bottom of the fermenter you are racking to to avoid any aeration.

3. I don't rack any more anyway but it's always good to experiment with your own system. I may try racking again as a test. Be interested to know how it goes for you.

:beer:


----------



## dickTed (13/4/06)

I've had a batch in secondary for 4 weeks, and another for 1 week.
The first was meant to be bottled, but I am getting very short of bottles and stubbies. (I've eased off drinking but kept brewing)( Trying to get back into my R.M.Williams jeans)

I rang the LHBS and asked if he has a regulator. I know he's got kegs and gas. He'll have a reg today, so there'll soon be plenty of empty bottles around here.

The cool weather negates the need for fermenting fridges, so one of them can pose as a keg fridge until next summer.

Reckon I'll be asking stupid questions about gas pressure and force carbonation by tonight.


----------



## Jazzafish (13/4/06)

Sometimes I rack, sometimes I don't... My decision depends on taken samples clarity and gravity.

If I'm close to final gravity and it looks like mud, I'll rack it to another fermenter and in extreme cases add finnings. However I try to obey the purity law when I can get away with it.

Also if there is alot of sedimate, threatening to rise anove the tap level...I tend to rack. 

However, if it is almost finnished fermenting, there is a tolerable amount of sedimate, and it is clear... I'll bypass secondary and condition it in a keg.


----------



## cubbie (13/4/06)

AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:


> This thread has encouraged me to rack (?) my current brew. Iwas given a second fermenter recently. Can I use this as the secondary.
> 
> Any pointers or hints?
> 
> [post="119709"][/post]​




Just back on this comment.

Yes a second fermenter is fine, however you would be better off using a food grade jerry can,cube or other container that has a smaller head space than a fermenter. This will decrease your risk oxidation. You can pick them up for $20 or less.

Secondly you have two process to consider here.

Mostly this thread has talked about Secondary although CC'ing (Cold Conditioning/Lagering) has also been mentioned. these are 2 distinct processes.

Secondary, is generally considered to be secondary fermentation. Ie you move the beer off the yeast cake and allow it to ferment out the final few points, and clean up the flavour profile. this obviously clears the beer somewhat as well.

CC'ing - When considering ales is primarily for improving the clarity of the beer, though I beleive it improves the beer flavour wise as well.
For lagers the process is called lagering (cold storing) and is generally done over a longer period of time. Lagering will greatly improve your lagers, as well as clear the beer. To CC/Lager you drop the temp of the beer to a range of 0-5c.

What ever process you chose, both will clear your beer. You may want to try a few different routines and see what you like. For the record.

Ales - after 1 week primary I rack to secondary for a week and the in the same vessle CC for a week.
Lagers - After 2 weeks primary i do a rest (raise temp) for about 48 hours and then rack to jerry can and lager for 4 weeks.


Well that was my brief on the process. I am sure you can get better info from most other members and following some of the links posted.


----------



## mje1980 (14/4/06)

I am a kegger, and my most brewed beers are bitters and pales. I have found that i prefer to not give them a secondary, as i like to drink these beers young while the flavours are still strong. I find after a month or so the flavour smooths out, which is great, but, just like a weizen, i think a bitter ( especially a low gravity bitter ) is best drunk young. As for clarity, my beers are always at least see through, albeit not completely. But usually, depending on the yeast strain, will clear after a few weeks in the keg.


----------



## Mr Bond (14/4/06)

I rack all ales except weizens


----------



## poppa joe (14/4/06)

Try racking going from tap to tap.
I do and it is easy as///
cheers 
PJ


----------



## dickTed (14/4/06)

My normal procedure these days is 2 weeks primary and 2 weeks secondary.


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (19/4/06)

poppa joe said:


> Try racking going from tap to tap.
> I do and it is easy as///
> cheers
> PJ
> [post="120371"][/post]​


Ta Poppa Joe.

I went tap to tap and it was piss easy.

Lost a couple of litres (left behind), but I guess thats the price you pay.


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (25/4/06)

Bottled my first attempt at racking last night.

Looking good. Near as you like to Crystal clear, Very fine head I think and a beautiful palish amber. I was aiming at a very refreshing, light bodies, full flavoured, quaffing beer, and so far I reckon it might be close. Pity I missed the summer with it.

There was hardly any sediment left in the fermenter too. 

The Temps in melbourne have been low recently so this brew has hardly come up above 16C. I racked the brew on day 11 (OG - 1038 > SG - 1008). I didnt fridge it and left it for another 6 days then bottle (FG - 1005).


Whoooeee I cant wait to give this a burl, but Ill have to wait for about 3 weeks as I used Pride of Ringwood and Aus Cluster.

Thanks all for the advice. Very helpful.

Does anyone know what other qualities are effected by the secondary apart from clarity?


----------



## Jim - Perth (1/5/06)

I started racking to secondary on my 5th brew & have not stopped since.
I have decided to be more flexible in future & take it on a case by case basis.
Unless the brew is a bit cloudy at the end of primary I am going to try giving up the secondary & (immediately after primary) either 1) racking/bulkpriming into the bottling bucket immediately prior to bottling it; or
2) racking it into jerry for cc'ing.
In either case I will give it longer in primary than I used to.


----------



## spambait (4/5/06)

I've racked to secondary for most of my brews for all of the usual reasons (clarity, shelf-life, visual appeal, karma, etc...), but there are a few more reasons that I tend to use secondary to help me finish things off. 

1. Beer that's had a chance to age a little without sitting on all that dead yeast tends to feel a little cleaner on the palate... or so I think. I guess that just one of those personal preference things. I know a guy who's quite happy to drink all of the dregs at the bottle of a bottom of home brew just because it's really yeasty, where I'd feel ill (and somewhat purged) if I did the same.  

2. Secondary is when I tend to add the Insinglass, as I can do so without stirring up the sediment just to get my finings in... and it also helps me avoid knocking the beer about too much and risking oxidation, as I usually put the Insinglass in the secondary fermenter first, and then allow the beer to mix itself into the Insinglass just by the usual gentle swirling action that occurs naturally whenever you transfer a liquid from one vessel to another.

3. I tend to use liquid yeasts almost exclusively, and it can sometimes be a little hard to get the yeast at it's freshest. As a result, I've had several batches where the fermentation gets a little stuck, and I find that once a half-finished beer has been transferred to secondary, the yeast seems to behave as if it's partying at somebody else's house and suddenly gets all active again... I guess because the yeast cells have found a "new" source of fermentables.

Just my 2c worth.

S.


----------



## Tseay (8/5/06)

I have a slightly different problem and would appreciate the readerships' advice.
I have two beers almost at the end of primary, one a bitter, the other an APA. ( around 1015 yesterday).

They have to be gassed and ready for consumption by Saturday afternoon.

Normally I'd rack to secondary and then cold condition, but on this occasion, time is of the essence. My preference is to rack the beers tonight and give them several days cold conditioning to clear then a little ( esp the APA) before kegging. 

Alternatively I could then rack to secondary and let them finish off fermentation at 18-20 c and then keg.

Grateful for any ideas and comments.

Cheers

T


----------



## Stuster (8/5/06)

It depends on if you think it's done or not. It seems that you think fermentation is not quite done. IMO you'd be better off letting it sit in primary as long as you can. Leaving on this yeast cake is (from my reading and my experience) going to clear up the flavour of the beer more quickly than transferring it to a secondary. Have a look at this link, even John Palmer agrees with no secondary now.  :lol: 



> In the next edition of HtB, I confess that I rarely rack to a secondary these days, and I no longer recommend racking every beer to a secondary to get it off the trub.
> As many other brewers have noted, just leaving it alone in the primary for 3-4 weeks accomplishes the secondary fermentation or conditioning processes, and the beer is much improved over one that was moved too soon. Like MtnBrewer, I rack lagers*, and high gravity beers, and fruit beers. Otherwise I just leave it in the primary.
> 
> *I didn't rack a Vienna I make for the SCal homebrew fest last year, just lagered it in the primary and it was great.
> ...


----------



## KoNG (8/5/06)

interesting stuster. is that from his website...?
Tseay, i've had a lot of my brews halting at around 1.015 some even 1.016 (i think my problem has been S-04 dropping out and forming cement in the bottom of my fermenter.!) i think your best bet would be to give the primary a little shake, swirl or stir to re-suspend (that has been getting me the next few points)... then maybe rack and chill on wednesday/thursday for a day or 2 if you think its needed.

All that said 1.015 is good if you ask me for the bitter. little less abv but its a great FG for english beers IMHO.


----------



## Stuster (8/5/06)

Kong

No it's from a Brewboard thread. Follow the link above. It's a few pages, lots of experienced brewers don't use secondary any more. John's comments are on page 3 I think.

I agree with Kong, 1015 should be fine, depending on the original gravity. :unsure:


----------



## Tseay (8/5/06)

Guys,

Thanks for the input. 

I'll hold it in primary at 18/20c for as long as possible then chill it in the primary before transfering it to the keg. Both OGs were around 1045. Used English Ale yeast with the bitter and the Californian Ale yeast with the APA. The APA was showing some signs of active fermentation as of yesterday. Bitter SG seems to have stopped falling.

Thanks

T


----------



## RobboMC (8/5/06)

I have wanted to move to secondaryfermenting so my ales can get some flavour enhancement before bottling. Also takes the pressure off getting round to the bottling once primary is complete. I have read in an american bewing book that the secondary vessel MUST be a glass carboy. Is this true, or can it be food grade plastic? I fully understand the need to reduce oxidation and that it needs to be smaller than the primary vessel. My solution will be to make the brew up to the same volume as the secondary. Should I leave any head room is secondary or fill it right up?
Yes, I know it needs an airlock or it may blow the lid off.
But reading some of this I am starting to wonder if secondary is worth it at all.

How long can I leave in primary without getting autolosis? I recently left a brew forn 14 days after after obvious fermentation ceased and all was Ok.


----------



## T.D. (8/5/06)

The last 10 or so ales I have brewed have not been racked to secondary. This has mainly been due to me having a bunch of beers fermenting all at once and not having any spare fermenters, but its also basically because I don't see the point anymore. I find there is virtually no difference between a beer that has been racked to secondary and one that hasn't. I am getting a keg system imminantly and when I do I will rack into a keg, and CC it in the keg until I require it to be on tap. I am predicting this will be the only form of "secondary" that I use for ales in future.


----------



## Weizguy (8/5/06)

Tseay said:


> I have a slightly different problem and would appreciate the readerships' advice.
> I have two beers almost at the end of primary, one a bitter, the other an APA. ( around 1015 yesterday).
> 
> They have to be gassed and ready for consumption by Saturday afternoon.
> ...



I'd suggest that you (maybe, in future) try racking to the keg and cc while gassing up. I recall that Ross sez he does this.

I'm lazy, so of course I'd try this method.

Seth


----------



## Tseay (8/5/06)

Robbo,

I suspect the issue of glass vs plastic becomes more more important if you are looking at long term lagering/cold conditioning. eg Oktoberfest, some pilseners etc. 

The principle behind secondary fermentation is supposed to be that it is carried out relatively early in the process so that the beer continues to ferment and provides a layer of carbon dixoxide to protect the beer. I suspect that people use the terms secondary fermentation and cold conditioning and mean the same thing.

I think there are some practices around that are important when it comes to brewing mega litres of beer' but would benefit from some testing when it comes to small scale brewing. 

Radical Brewings, debunking of Hot Side Aearation is an example. 

T


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (8/5/06)

Just a point to note.

I bottle and I have recently tried racking to secondary following reading this thread. (See earlier postings). 

The Brew that I bottled has now been sitting for around a fortnight and although I wouldnt really consider drinking my brew untill at least a month after bottling, I do like to tast it at about this stage. This gives me a perspective on how much it improves over time.

I tried my secondary conditioned brew on the weekend and was shocked to find that I stuck one of a very few flat bottlesNot completely flat but pretty still). It was only when I tried a second bottle and it was also flat that I realised that the bottled conditioning is obviously heaps slower without sediment even though this has been at ambient tempperature (15 - 20 oC I guess).

I must admit I am quite excited at the clarity of the brew though.

cheers

ATOMT


----------



## Jim - Perth (8/5/06)

Having read all this & the Brew Board posts, I'm more determined than ever to look at phasing out secondary wherever possible.


----------



## Fingerlickin_B (8/5/06)

T.D. said:


> I am getting a keg system imminantly and when I do I will rack into a keg, and CC it in the keg until I require it to be on tap. I am predicting this will be the only form of "secondary" that I use for ales in future.



That's what I do and it works great :beer: 

Only one difference though...I let mine sit in the kegs at room temps for a week or so before chilling. 

PZ.


----------



## goatherder (8/5/06)

I've been reading and listening to a lot of Jamil Zainasheff (from the brewing network) lately and he advocates not using a secondary for ales. He reasons that autolysis is not going to be a problem for at least a month and the yeast needs around 10 days to finish cleaning up after itself. to clear the beer, just rack to keg or bottling bucket. i'm going to try going without a secondary to see how it goes.


----------



## Pumpy (8/5/06)

Malnourished said:


> Ross said:
> 
> 
> > filter
> ...



I must confess to being a filter convert !!! saves time turns the beer around quickly, no discernable difference in flavour.

perhaps we can call it :-

"The No Secondary Method"

Pumpy


----------



## Tseay (16/5/06)

Just a word of thanks for all the advice. I left both beers in primary for as long as possible then just dropped the temp to clear it a little, then straight into the keg, withn enough time to carbonate.

All went well.

T


----------



## Stuster (16/5/06)

Hallelujah! Another convert! One more saved.


----------



## colinw (16/5/06)

I mostly brew ales, and have been unable to detect any difference in quality of beers which I secondary and beers which I just crash chill and bottle/keg from primary.


----------



## James Squire (16/5/06)

I also mainly brew ales and I do rack to secondary but only cos from the start I was told it was the thing to do!!! Never tried otherwise actually. :huh: 

I have been thinking about a filter lately though so maybe I'll give the "No secondary method" a crack next brew!!!  

Cheers to all you ever informative brewing machines! :beerbang: 

JS


----------



## AngelTearsOnMyTongue (18/5/06)

AngelTearsOnMyTongue said:


> Just a point to note.
> 
> I bottle and I have recently tried racking to secondary following reading this thread. (See earlier postings).
> 
> ...




Tried another one last night. Although there was a little mnore _Fiiitz_ on opening, it was still pretty sweet and flattish. I cant get over how long its taking after a secondary.

Is this normal?:mellow: 

ATOTM


----------

