I just saw a video on tv about the President’s White House beer that got my attention on something. The brewer (chef) moved the beer from a 6-gallon primary carboy to a 5-gallon carboy for secondary. Why? Is this because it limits the space available for air (thus vastly reducing potential for contamination)? I’m guessing if I do this I need to ensure my primary fermentation is pretty much complete, or I would risk a blow-over (using the air-lock). Never saw this, and never have I been told about this in my short year of homebrewing. But, it just makes sense. Necessary or not? Thanks.
when i do do a secondary it always goes in a 5 gal carboy. you won’t have any more fermentation so no chance of a blowoff. the less headspace the better.
Got it. I knew it made sense to limit the amount of area for exposed air. Thanks, man.
Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock:
Skip the whole thing and leave it in the primary. This cuts your chances for oxydation and contamination to zero, frees up time, and may even result in better beer if as there’s no chance of interrupting the yeast as thy settle into dormancy. Most experienced brewers I know gave up “secondary” long ago. It’s just a marketing ploy to sell you an extra carboy, extra sanitizer/cleaner, etc. Anything that would happen in a secondary vessel will happen in a bottle or keg anyway. Enjoy your additional free time… :cheers:
If you have any reason to believe that when you transfer you will have continuing fermentation that needs head space, you should not be transferring.
[quote=“Nighthawk”]Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock: [/quote]
Yeah, I honestly never considered it. What do you think about the comment above on not even using a secondary? I like to move my brew to a secondary to help reduce sediment, mainly. But, I’ve learned lately that if I have a 5 1/2 gallons of brew in a 6-gallon carboy, I have more than enough fluid to stay off the trub at the bottom. Therefore, no need for secondary. Thanks man.
That makes sense. Thanks.
[quote=“Nighthawk”]Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock: [/quote]
Forgive me, Nighthawk and I know this may sound like a stupid question, but what/where are HBS’s? I know my title says “master brewer”, but clearly that title needs to be adjusted to 500 or 1000 posts, if I may be so humble.
[quote=“monk-e-business”][quote=“Nighthawk”]Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock: [/quote]
but what/where are HBS’s? [/quote]
Home Brew Shops (or stores). All of the NB recipes recommend a secondary stage even though may people consider it unnecessary and added risk. But the choice is yours.
Skip the whole thing and leave it in the primary. This cuts your chances for oxydation and contamination to zero, frees up time, and may even result in better beer if as there’s no chance of interrupting the yeast as thy settle into dormancy. Most experienced brewers I know gave up “secondary” long ago. It’s just a marketing ploy to sell you an extra carboy, extra sanitizer/cleaner, etc. Anything that would happen in a secondary vessel will happen in a bottle or keg anyway. Enjoy your additional free time… :cheers: [/quote]
Really? With this crap again? If you won’t answer the question, why do you post?
To rebut, you run a risk of oxidation and contamination with every brew, secondary or not. No brewer can cut that risk to zero, period(.) Saying that most experienced brewers don’t use the secondary is false. Perhaps experienced brewers you’ve read about don’t secondary. That is not most brewers. In fact, nearly every master brewer around the country uses a secondary. You mention a marking ploy but I feel your “no-secondary” agenda is more slight-of-hand than this so-called conspiracy. You’re targeting homebrewers that are trying to gain knowledge of a particular brewing operation in which you choose not to partake. Completely disregarding a brewing procedure and telling someone it’s never necessary is close-minded. Seriously, guy, give it a rest already!
Really? With this crap again? If you won’t answer the question, why do you post?
To rebut, you run a risk of oxidation and contamination with every brew, secondary or not. No brewer can cut that risk to zero, period(.) Saying that most experienced brewers don’t use the secondary is false. Perhaps experienced brewers you’ve read about don’t secondary. That is not most brewers. In fact, nearly every master brewer around the country uses a secondary. You mention a marking ploy but I feel your “no-secondary” agenda is more slight-of-hand than this so-called conspiracy. You’re targeting homebrewers that are trying to gain knowledge of a particular brewing operation in which you choose not to partake. Completely disregarding a brewing procedure and telling someone it’s never necessary is close-minded. Seriously, guy, give it a rest already![/quote]
:shock:
RDWHAHB
[quote=“mvsawyer”][quote=“Demus”]
Skip the whole thing and leave it in the primary. This cuts your chances for oxydation and contamination to zero, frees up time, and may even result in better beer if as there’s no chance of interrupting the yeast as thy settle into dormancy. Most experienced brewers I know gave up “secondary” long ago. It’s just a marketing ploy to sell you an extra carboy, extra sanitizer/cleaner, etc. Anything that would happen in a secondary vessel will happen in a bottle or keg anyway. Enjoy your additional free time… :cheers: [/quote]
Really? With this crap again? If you won’t answer the question, why do you post?
To rebut, you run a risk of oxidation and contamination with every brew, secondary or not. No brewer can cut that risk to zero, period(.) Saying that most experienced brewers don’t use the secondary is false. Perhaps experienced brewers you’ve read about don’t secondary. That is not most brewers. In fact, nearly every master brewer around the country uses a secondary. You mention a marking ploy but I feel your “no-secondary” agenda is more slight-of-hand than this so-called conspiracy. You’re targeting homebrewers that are trying to gain knowledge of a particular brewing operation in which you choose not to partake. Completely disregarding a brewing procedure and telling someone it’s never necessary is close-minded. Seriously, guy, give it a rest already![/quote]
Maybe I like to debate; apparently I’m not alone! If you’ll read my post a bit more carefully, I wrote most experienced brewers I know gave up using a secondary. I did not say commercial brewers, nor did I say all brewers. Do you know the people I know?
As for chances of oxidation, there is certainly no way to cut them to zero for the entire brewing process. But the chances of them occurring during a transfer to secondary versus sitting idle in the primary are vastly increased for that step. My “agenda” is simply to advise newer brewers on ways to maximize benefits while minimizing chances for off flavors. What’s yours? Are you the “post police” or something? Aren’t I entitled to my opinion? Also, for the record I do partake in the practice of secondary fermentation, I just don’t do it as rule. I like to consider more than a one paragraph kit recipe sheet when I make my decisions on how I will brew a batch. If that’s a conspiracy, I’m guilty as charged!!! 8)
Seriously, these kind of debates are almost like politics. Some people are strongly for, some strongly against and both of those groups are going to be the most vocal because they think they are right. Lots of new brewers are looking for the best way to get a beer they brewed into a glass and enjoy it. My first batch, I know nothing about temp control, pitching enough yeast and being patient. I nervously followed the directions to a T and fretted on every step. I remember sending photos of my beer sitting in a secondary better bottle to anyone that would listen because I thought I “killed it”. It was just sitting there lifeless, no foam, bubbles, and the top was somewhat clear after a week and the bottom was cloudy. YIKES!
So while I chuckle now at some of the panic posts from the “new” guys, I also know it was not that long ago for me and I had all the same questions and concerns.
I also belong to a guitar forum that is civil and has really good people. It started small and has grown a lot but one thing that really helped was that several of the really experienced people got together and put together a “FAQ” page for each of the major topics. It was a sticky at the top. Whenever someone “new” posted a panic, new brewer post, they were just pointed to the FAQ page on that topic in a friendly way and it ended a lot of the internal debates on many topics.
Just a thought
560sdl, great post, and good points. Certain topics kinda set me off but I never intend on being rude or condescending. In the above, I did feel I had to defend myself a bit as my comments were being confused a bit. Your story of your first brew day brought me back to my, very similar first brew day. My intent here is to let new brewers know that transferring to secondary has it’s place, but is not necessary on every brew. I wish someone had help me simplify that first, chaotic experience.
:cheers:
I plan on transfering to a secondary for one reason. So I can use the primary for another batch!
Unless you are dry hopping it seems most people decide to leave the beer alone as much as possible. Not just here but also on Beer Advocates HB posts.
[quote=“560sdl”]Seriously, these kind of debates are almost like politics. Some people are strongly for, some strongly against and both of those groups are going to be the most vocal because they think they are right. Lots of new brewers are looking for the best way to get a beer they brewed into a glass and enjoy it. My first batch, I know nothing about temp control, pitching enough yeast and being patient. I nervously followed the directions to a T and fretted on every step. I remember sending photos of my beer sitting in a secondary better bottle to anyone that would listen because I thought I “killed it”. It was just sitting there lifeless, no foam, bubbles, and the top was somewhat clear after a week and the bottom was cloudy. YIKES!
So while I chuckle now at some of the panic posts from the “new” guys, I also know it was not that long ago for me and I had all the same questions and concerns.
I also belong to a guitar forum that is civil and has really good people. It started small and has grown a lot but one thing that really helped was that several of the really experienced people got together and put together a “FAQ” page for each of the major topics. It was a sticky at the top. Whenever someone “new” posted a panic, new brewer post, they were just pointed to the FAQ page on that topic in a friendly way and it ended a lot of the internal debates on many topics.
Just a thought[/quote]
Thanks for the info. I like your idea of a FAQ area.
[quote=“560sdl”][quote=“monk-e-business”][quote=“Nighthawk”]Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock: [/quote]
but what/where are HBS’s? [/quote]
Home Brew Shops (or stores). All of the NB recipes recommend a secondary stage even though may people consider it unnecessary and added risk. But the choice is yours.[/quote]
Got it. Thanks.
[quote=“monk-e-business”][quote=“Nighthawk”]Really Monk?
There have been 4-5 topics on secondary’s in the last week. All the recipe sheets from the HBS’s say to transfer to a “secondary”.
:shock: [/quote]
Yeah, I honestly never considered it. What do you think about the comment above on not even using a secondary? I like to move my brew to a secondary to help reduce sediment, mainly. But, I’ve learned lately that if I have a 5 1/2 gallons of brew in a 6-gallon carboy, I have more than enough fluid to stay off the trub at the bottom. Therefore, no need for secondary. Thanks man.[/quote]
I tried to respond last night, but my computer shut down on me.
My thought process is much the same as Demus’s.
1: any sediment that will fall out in 3 weeks will be the same if it’s in 1 vessel for 3 weeks or 1 vessel for 1 week and a second vessel for 2 weeks.
2: If you leave .5" of beer behind in both vessels, you lost 1" of beer. Or you could leave .66" behind in 1 vessel. More beer into the bottle.
3: 1 less carboy to clean/sanitize. And racking cane/tubing.
4: Time involved.
If there was an issue with “dead” yeast. We would see it in our bottled beer.
I’ve gone past the “RDWHAHB” stage and I believe: “this to will be beer” and “we are not trying to go to the moon”.
