Ok, I’ll admit that I’m struggling to bite my tongue here. Mods, please let me know if I’m being unnecessarily argumentative, but I think that this is a pretty good discussion. Denny, I really do respect your opinion, too, but I’m taking a bit of an issue with making a blanket statement and validating it with something like “well I’ve done XXX batches so it must be so”, which although isn’t exactly what you said, it does sound a lot like it.
I do agree that almost all of the time, there is no issue with opening a bucket, sampling, racking, dry hopping, open-system bottling. Porters, stouts, ambers, pilsners, saisons, you name it… just fine. No risk of significant oxidation.
All I’m trying to do is point out that for these two specific cases - highly late/dry-hopped IPA/DIPA and beers containing brett - the risks of oxidation are very real and one can realize a significant improvement by doing everything in their power to prevent the introduction of oxygen in their process. Even small amounts of O2 post-fermentation will quickly degrade hop aromatics, and bottle conditioning a beer where brett is the dominant microbe can lead to unpleasant levels of tetrahydropyridine when small amounts of O2 are introduced in same processes.
Getting back to dry hopping, we probably have all seen it but I’d like to point you folks back to Michael Tonsmeire’s article in the July-August 2015 BYO… “Without yeast cells in the way, alcohol extracts hop oils largely unchanged. However, be careful not to introduce any air if you choose this route; without yeast to scavenge oxygen, the hops aromatics will oxidize quickly, muddying their fresh aroma within weeks.”
I certainly don’t feel like you’re being argumentative. Differing experiences and viewpoints are how we all learn. And the only reason I mention the number of batches is as a way of saying I’ve “tested” it repeatedly. I have had absolutely no problem with my method for highly/late hopped beers. I make so few beers with brett that I really have no experience to comment about. And finally, I know Mike pretty well, and I disagree with his point. My own testing has shown me that I get better, truer hop aroma by getting the beer off the yeast before dry hopping. Stan Hieronymus agrees with that.
@denny, if I ever run into you at a bar or other event, the first round’s on me!
This is probably a discussion for a different thread, but the scope of his article is pretty darn interesting to me and one of the things that has gotten me into all-brett or sacch/brett IPA and saison. I don’t think he’s going for a “true” hop aroma with this method, but a profoundly different hop character by allowing the brett to work on the hop aromatics. I’ve only successfully pulled it off a couple of times, but when you get the right combination of yeast, hop, and stage of fermentation, it’s just phenomenal.
For my next parlor trick I am going to ask about primary and secondary fermentation . . . that should get the opinions flowing! Thanks for all the info everyone. It’s a ton of great advice.
You should use the “Reply as linked topic” to do this. Also there already is an existing topic discussing this.
There might be a secondary fermentation in winemaking, but in beer the second vessel is a clearing vessel or bright tank.
It is a sunny calm day before another week of rain and snow is in forecast. That is the only reason for this post.
It’s ok to call it a secondary. Everyone knows what you are talking about. Just like when people say pajamas even though they aren’t technically pajamas in the original sense.
. . . that should get the opinions flowing! Thanks for all the info everyone. It’s a ton of great advice.
It’s ok to call it a secondary. Everyone knows what you are talking about. Just like when people say pajamas even though they aren’t technically pajamas in the original sense.