How Long in Secondary?

[CrossBones]

I'm working on my second batch ever, a Superior Strong Ale from Midwest. The first batch, an Irish Red, I left in the primary for two weeks before bottling, but a neighbor gave me another bucket so I figured I'd use it as a secondary fermenter and give that a try. Yesterday I racked from primary to secondary after 7 days, and it smelled AMAZING! But, I'm a little concerned because as I was transferring I noticed some little bubbles - not many, but enough to make me think it wasn't yet finished fermenting. Will the beer finish fermenting in the secondary, or did I just ruin my batch? How long should I wait in the secondary before bottling?

 

[usafbeerlover]

I am sure someone else will say the same. Leave it in the primary for a least three weeks preferably 4. It will come out clear and taste amazing. Use secondary for dry hopping or adding any list extras.

 

[RM-MN]

No, you didn't ruin your batch by putting it in a secondary a little early but leaving it in the primary longer would have been better. It will finish fermenting in the secondary just fine. I'd leave it for 2 weeks so it will have 3 weeks total from the start of fermenting, the same amount of time as I would if I were to leave it in the primary.

 

[zeus53219]

You'll be fine. Leave it in the secondary for a week to 10 days then bottle.

 

[Pezman1]

I'm working on my second batch ever, a Superior Strong Ale from Midwest. The first batch, an Irish Red, I left in the primary for two weeks before bottling, but a neighbor gave me another bucket so I figured I'd use it as a secondary fermenter and give that a try. Yesterday I racked from primary to secondary after 7 days, and it smelled AMAZING! But, I'm a little concerned because as I was transferring I noticed some little bubbles - not many, but enough to make me think it wasn't yet finished fermenting. Will the beer finish fermenting in the secondary, or did I just ruin my batch? How long should I wait in the secondary before bottling?

Not sure just how big this beer is, but it might need at least a month total time if not more. I'd leave it be for at least two weeks, check a gravity AND taste it to see where you are at.

I wouldn't have used a secondary, but if you do in the future, let it sit in primary a couple weeks before you secondary.

Pez.

 

[CrossBones]

Wow, there are so many varied opinions on whether or not to use a secondary! I know the debate is covered elsewhere in the forum, but I guess I'm just surprised that so many people advise against a secondary when the "pros" (the guys on the how-to-brew DVDs and videos I've seen) make it sound like using a secondary is a more advanced and better system of brewing.

 

[Yooper]

Wow, there are so many varied opinions on whether or not to use a secondary! I know the debate is covered elsewhere in the forum, but I guess I'm just surprised that so many people advise against a secondary when the "pros" (the guys on the how-to-brew DVDs and videos I've seen) make it sound like using a secondary is a more advanced and better system of brewing.

Well, the "pros" don't use buckets for secondary, so that's one thing! A bucket has a very wide headspace as opposed to a carboy, so if you're doing to do secondary a carboy would be preferable. I wouldn't move a beer to a bucket once fermentation stopped, as it wouldn't be producing co2 anymore to fill that wide headspace.

But a professional brewery doesn't really use a secondary. Not in the way we're discussing it. What happens in a brewery is that active fermentation happens in the fermenter. Once the beer is done fermenting, it's moved over to the bright tank ("secondary") for clearing and conditioning so that another batch can be started in the fermenter. Because of the way the fermenters are set up, more pressure is exerted onto the yeast cake from the larger amount of beer on it, and that can cause some problems with the yeast.

In the homebrew setting, where we tend to have either 7 gallon buckets or smaller, little pressure is exerted on top of the yeast so that it doesn't cause any problems, or we have conicals where we can just dump the trub if the fermenters are bigger.

A "secondary" is really a misnomer in brewing. I guess it must be a holdover term from winemaking, where there really is a "secondary fermentation". In a brewery, it's a "bright tank" or clearing vessel. A secondary fermenter means that fermentation is happening in a new vessel- like adding honey to a wine, or something like that. That's when I really use the secondary.

If someone chooses to use a "secondary" (clearing vessel or bright tank), that's fine. It won't harm the beer at all, and it will open up a bucket for a primary. But it's not necessary, as nothing magical happens in moving the beer. It will still clear when the yeast is done working, and moving it doesn't make it happen faster.

 

[Alemann]

Your brews fine if you feel you need a secondary use one . I used them on my first 3 brews , and 7 without no significant difference on clarity or taste.

 

[homebrewdad]

There are lots of opinions on using a secondary or not, though I would agree that you ought to use a carboy for secondary, or skip the step.

To answer a question you asked that everyone has skipped - the bubbles don't necessarily mean a thing. You can get bubbles even in a beer that has been sitting for over a month; CO2 often gets released from solution due to agitation of the beer, temperature changes, etc.

The only way to know for sure if fermentation is done is to take gravity readings on different days. If you get matching readings over, say, three days, then you are pretty certain that fermentatio is complete.

Bubbles - either in the airlock, or in suspension - tell you nothing useful.

 

[dbhokie]

I am a novice, but despite seeing everyone's feelings about secondaries, I still use one. I like using one to improve the clarity of the beer, and help rack more trub out. I usually watch my primary until the fermentation slows way down, then take a sanitized 1/2 cup measuring cup and scoop out some beer and test the gravity. If it is well within my finish range of where I want to be, I transfer, if not I leave it be for a while again and check it. I try not to check the gravity very often as all I can see it does is increase chances of contamination.

I'm not really sure I understand some of the 3-4 weeks for all beers in primary. I just finished a Strong Belgian Golden ale with highly attenuating yeast, that finished primary after 7 days at 1.005. I saw no reason to keep it in primary at that point, although I may be missing something entirely.

 

[homebrewdad]

I am a novice, but despite seeing everyone's feelings about secondaries, I still use one. I like using one to improve the clarity of the beer, and help rack more trub out. I usually watch my primary until the fermentation slows way down, then take a sanitized 1/2 cup measuring cup and scoop out some beer and test the gravity. If it is well within my finish range of where I want to be, I transfer, if not I leave it be for a while again and check it. I try not to check the gravity very often as all I can see it does is increase chances of contamination.

I'm not really sure I understand some of the 3-4 weeks for all beers in primary. I just finished a Strong Belgian Golden ale with highly attenuating yeast, that finished primary after 7 days at 1.005. I saw no reason to keep it in primary at that point, although I may be missing something entirely.

I use secondaries, too.

What you are missing in a short primary is the mellowing of your beer. The yeast cake does more than turn sugar into ethanol - the yeast will remove fermentation byproducts from the beer if given the chance. This gives you fewer off flavors, and better overall beer.

You absolutely can rack - or even bottle - the beer after seven days if your FG is stable. If you wait, though, your beer will taste better.

 

[Yooper]

I'm not really sure I understand some of the 3-4 weeks for all beers in primary. I just finished a Strong Belgian Golden ale with highly attenuating yeast, that finished primary after 7 days at 1.005. I saw no reason to keep it in primary at that point, although I may be missing something entirely.

I don't understand the 3-4 weeks, either! A well made beer (proper amount of yeast pitched, and keeping the temperature at the correct temperature) should be done fermenting in 5 days or so. What happens after the bulk of fermentation is over, the yeast are still active and are still trying to eat. After they finish the fermentable sugars, they will actually go back and digest some less preferred foods, including some of their own waste products. That's what is happening when brewers talk about "the yeast cleaning up after itself".

But that process takes just a day or two, so most beers are ready in a week or so. Even leaving it another week to fall clear means that I package almost all of my beers by day 14.

I guess a poorly made beer can use some more time for "clean up" as some off-flavors would begin to fade a bit with time. But if the off-flavors aren't created to begin with, then that extra couple of weeks is unnecessary. It probably won't hurt, though.

 

[iskuse]

I've made about 10 batches so far. I have always used a secondary. I use a carboy for the secondary though, not a bucket. I do a primary for 7 days, a secondary for 7 days, check the gravity. if it's good I go to bottle. I bottle condition for 2 weeks. The one thing though, after bottle conditioning for 2 weeks, the beer still tastes green. sometimes it takes another 2 weeks in the bottle to develop the flavor. beer takes time, there is no way to speed that process up. if I'm at my F.G, I bottle. Using the secondary for me is to basically get clearer beer. I'm not saying there is a right or wrong way, just do what works for you. I did a belgian strong and after 4 weeks I tried it. it wasn't bad, but a month later it was way better, 2 months even better. So technically, I could have left it in the secondary or primary for 4 weeks, then bottled for 2 and it would have tasted better right out of the bottle. My point here is, when beer is in the bottle, it's hard to keep them lying around to mature, which means you never really know how good it could have been if you drink them too soon. in a carboy, it makes it a lot easier not to "crack" one open

 

[ayoungrad]

I guess a poorly made beer can use some more time for "clean up" as some off-flavors would begin to fade a bit with time. But if the off-flavors aren't created to begin with, then that extra couple of weeks is unnecessary. It probably won't hurt, though.

I agree with this completely.

I have made several IIPAs (1.070-1.090 OG). And I've come to the realization that if I do everything properly (primarily yeast health and fermentation temps) then I keep it in primary for 2 weeks (including dry hopping in the primary within the same two week period - and I ALWAYS confirm a stable FG) and then bottle. And they taste best between 2 and 3 weeks after bottling.

Granted that is for a hoppy beer which is best when younger. But I have found the same 2 weeks works well with most other beers. Probably the major exceptions are complex, darker beers which mellow with more time in the primary (and for barleywines).

The advantage of bottling after 2 weeks is that there are more yeast in suspension than there would be after longer times before bottling. And therefore, carbonation occurs more rapidly.

 

[Pezman1]

I am a novice, but despite seeing everyone's feelings about secondaries, I still use one. I like using one to improve the clarity of the beer, and help rack more trub out. I usually watch my primary until the fermentation slows way down, then take a sanitized 1/2 cup measuring cup and scoop out some beer and test the gravity. If it is well within my finish range of where I want to be, I transfer, if not I leave it be for a while again and check it. I try not to check the gravity very often as all I can see it does is increase chances of contamination.

I'm not really sure I understand some of the 3-4 weeks for all beers in primary. I just finished a Strong Belgian Golden ale with highly attenuating yeast, that finished primary after 7 days at 1.005. I saw no reason to keep it in primary at that point, although I may be missing something entirely.

My Hefes usually go two weeks, most others three weeks to even four, no secondary. I have found that my beers improved in taste when I :

1. stopped using a secondary
2. Let them sit on their yeast for three weeks to four.

I do not know the science behind this, just that it is so. I also know I enjoy not bothering with a secondary. It also gets rid of a potential oxidation or sanitation problem. Note the word potential.

Pez.

 

[Pezman1]

I agree with this completely.

I have made several IIPAs (1.070-1.090 OG). And I've come to the realization that if I do everything properly (primarily yeast health and fermentation temps) then I keep it in primary for 2 weeks (including dry hopping in the primary within the same two week period - and I ALWAYS confirm a stable FG) and then bottle. And they taste best between 2 and 3 weeks after bottling.

Granted that is for a hoppy beer which is best when younger. But I have found the same 2 weeks works well with most other beers. Probably the major exceptions are complex, darker beers which mellow with more time in the primary (and for barleywines).

The advantage of bottling after 2 weeks is that there are more yeast in suspension than there would be after longer times before bottling. And therefore, carbonation occurs more rapidly.

Can't agree that people who find their beers are better with no secondary or bottle after two weeks are making beer improperly.

Also can't agree that it takes longer to carb up a beer bottled after three to four weeks than two. At least not in any noticeable way. Other than Hefes, my fastest carb recently was with a stout I let sit for almost a month. Tasted great too.....pretty sure I made it properly

Pez.

 

[ayoungrad]

Can't agree that people who find their beers are better with no secondary or bottle after two weeks are making beer improperly.

Also can't agree that it takes longer to carb up a beer bottled after three to four weeks than two. At least not in any noticeable way. Other than Hefes, my fastest carb recently was with a stout I let sit for almost a month. Tasted great too.....pretty sure I made it properly

Pez.

I'm not saying fast carbing has anything to do with doing things properly. It has to do with the amount of healthy yeast left in suspension. With a shorter time between pitching and priming, there are a greater number of healthy yeast cells in suspension. I have definitely found faster carbing with shorter times to be the case as I have slowly shortened my time before bottling.

In general for me... I say do what works for you, your set-up and your techniques. But 1 month from brew day to drinking a bottle of carbed IIPA works well for me, so I do it. If you or others have found that longer times work, far be it from me to disagree.

 

[JLem]

I don't understand the 3-4 weeks, either! A well made beer (proper amount of yeast pitched, and keeping the temperature at the correct temperature) should be done fermenting in 5 days or so. What happens after the bulk of fermentation is over, the yeast are still active and are still trying to eat. After they finish the fermentable sugars, they will actually go back and digest some less preferred foods, including some of their own waste products. That's what is happening when brewers talk about "the yeast cleaning up after itself".

But that process takes just a day or two, so most beers are ready in a week or so. Even leaving it another week to fall clear means that I package almost all of my beers by day 14.

I guess a poorly made beer can use some more time for "clean up" as some off-flavors would begin to fade a bit with time. But if the off-flavors aren't created to begin with, then that extra couple of weeks is unnecessary. It probably won't hurt, though.

I think part of the 3-4 week idea is partly to emphasize that it is OK to leave it in the primary for 3-4 weeks and to preach patience over worry. I leave most beers in primary for 2-4 weeks, mostly because I just don't have time to get to them and partly because I know I CAN leave them a while longer and they will be fine. I'm never under the gun to get a beer ready for anything in particular. And if I was, I would be sure to start it early enough.

I agree though that 3-4 weeks is probably unnecessary.

 

[Yooper]

I think part of the 3-4 week idea is partly to emphasize that it is OK to leave it in the primary for 3-4 weeks and to preach patience over worry.

And that's a good thing.

But it irks me that some people take that to mean "Leave it in the fermenter for a month or your beer will suck!" which is absolutely not the case. Leaving it in the fermenter for up to a month may be fine for some beers, but repeating it as a mantra as a must-do is what irks me. There are some people who prefer the character of the beer after a longer time on the yeast cake, while there are some who prefer the character of a beer after a shorter time on the yeast cake.

But either way, a couple of weeks in a fermenter will be good for the beer.

 

[Pezman1]

And that's a good thing.

But it irks me that some people take that to mean "Leave it in the fermenter for a month or your beer will suck!" which is absolutely not the case. Leaving it in the fermenter for up to a month may be fine for some beers, but repeating it as a mantra as a must-do is what irks me. There are some people who prefer the character of the beer after a longer time on the yeast cake, while there are some who prefer the character of a beer after a shorter time on the yeast cake.

But either way, a couple of weeks in a fermenter will be good for the beer.

I am not part of that mantra, but I do believe that much more beer has never reached its potential because of moving it to primary too soon or bottling it too soon rather than waiting a bit. It is VERY hard to find a post concerning beer not being as good because of skipping primary or bottling at three weeks versers two.

But, like you said, most of the conversation involves letting poeple know it is perfectly fine if you don't secondary or let your beer sit another week in primary.

Pez.

 

[Pezman1]

I'm not saying fast carbing has anything to do with doing things properly. It has to do with the amount of healthy yeast left in suspension. With a shorter time between pitching and priming, there are a greater number of healthy yeast cells in suspension. I have definitely found faster carbing with shorter times to be the case as I have slowly shortened my time before bottling.

In general for me... I say do what works for you, your set-up and your techniques. But 1 month from brew day to drinking a bottle of carbed IIPA works well for me, so I do it. If you or others have found that longer times work, far be it from me to disagree.

True, there are more yeast in suspension, but I don't believe the numbers ( 750 billion/trillion vs 725 billion/trillion???) make any appreciable or noticeable difference. My fastest carbing beer recently sat on its yeast for almost a month.

For an example: I just don't think you can make the statement that if you bottle at two weeks you will be carbed in two weeks, but if you bottle at three weeks you have to wait three weeks.
Pez.


EDIT - I am sure this probably has more to do with the flocculation characteristics of the yeast. I do not use a whole lot of highly flocculant strains.

 

[ayoungrad]

True, there are more yeast in suspension, but I don't believe the numbers ( 750 billion/trillion vs 725 billion/trillion???) make any appreciable or noticeable difference. My fastest carbing beer recently sat on its yeast for almost a month.

For an example: I just don't think you can make the statement that if you bottle at two weeks you will be carbed in two weeks, but if you bottle at three weeks you have to wait three weeks.
Pez.


EDIT - I am sure this probably has more to do with the flocculation characteristics of the yeast. I do not use a whole lot of highly flocculant strains.

FWIW, the experience I'm basing this on is with similar recipes (using 3-4 versus 2 weeks in primary) and the exact same yeast strains. And I don't have suspended yeast population numbers to differentiate 2 weeks from 3 weeks. But, from what I have read, once you rack, you are talking about yeast concentrations of only 1-10% of the initial pitching rates, so small differences in yeast population numbers will have a larger influence on the total amount of residual yeast. Maybe I'm mistaken about how much of a difference it makes, but it has certainly seemed to make a difference to me. I am almost guaranteed good carbonation by week 2, even on 9% alcohol batches.

I can't speak to your experience, but every time I go longer in the primary (I only used a secondary once in my very first batch) it takes longer to carbonate.

But, I suppose it doesn't really matter and this is all (sort of) off topic. Again, I say, do what works for you. This board is fueled by experience (real or academic) and opinions.

 

[CrossBones]

Well, the "pros" don't use buckets for secondary, so that's one thing! A bucket has a very wide headspace as opposed to a carboy, so if you're doing to do secondary a carboy would be preferable. I wouldn't move a beer to a bucket once fermentation stopped, as it wouldn't be producing co2 anymore to fill that wide headspace.

Touche' - I guess I knew that, but I used what I had...