Keep your beer in the fermentor for 4 weeks.

[PseudoChef]

Sure, if you are brewing sub-par beer and need to age out off flavors (some, which I'm convinced, aren't going anywhere - I'm looking at you, phenolics). How about this? Brew beer that doesn't have off flavors to begin with, and have your beer ready for packaging around 10 days or so. Show me a professional brewer that is having his or her beer sit in the fermentor for a month.

Sorry, but I'm starting to see this crop up in almost every single homebrew discussion I read nowadays and it's starting to piss me off.

[Ó Flannagáin]

Sure, if you are brewing sub-par beer and need to age out off flavors (some, which I'm convinced, aren't going anywhere - I'm looking at you, phenolics). How about this? Brew beer that doesn't have off flavors to begin with, and have your beer ready for packaging around 10 days or so. Show me a professional brewer that is having his or her beer sit in the fermentor for a month.

Sorry, but I'm starting to see this crop up in almost every single homebrew discussion I read nowadays and it's starting to piss me off.

I agree almost completely, although I do think phenolics fade a bit over time.

[Evan!]

Yeah, using this as a general rule is silly. I don't think it's so much a matter of off-flavors fading, but just that some beers take a little longer, depending on the yeast, gravity, IBU, etc., to really hit that sweet spot. Though, commercial brewers have a different process altogether (esp. when it comes to carbing and bottling), and have the pressures of getting the beer to market to make $$, so I don't really know if that's a terribly apt comparison. I remember interviewing the brewmaster at Blue Mountain and he told me that he once assisted in developing this method of fermentation where the wort was sent down a long series of troughs that were covered/impregnated with yeast. The high yeast-to-liquid surface ratio meant that by the time it reached the end of the troughs (which took a matter of minutes), fermentation was done. That's some shit.

[Ó Flannagáin]

Yeah, using this as a general rule is silly. I don't think it's so much a matter of off-flavors fading, but just that some beers take a little longer, depending on the yeast, gravity, IBU, etc., to really hit that sweet spot. Though, commercial brewers have a different process altogether (esp. when it comes to carbing and bottling), and have the pressures of getting the beer to market to make $$, so I don't really know if that's a terribly apt comparison. I remember interviewing the brewmaster at Blue Mountain and he told me that he once assisted in developing this method of fermentation where the wort was sent down a long series of troughs that were covered/impregnated with yeast. The high yeast-to-liquid surface ratio meant that by the time it reached the end of the troughs (which took a matter of minutes), fermentation was done. That's some shit.

no fucking way

[Evan!]

no fucking way

I know, sounds crazy, but Taylor's not the kind of guy to just make shit up.

[zoebisch01]

I see two sides to the coin, and there is a large gray area as well with this so bear with me. First off, it's a completely valid point in that as brewers we should do everything to ensure our beer doesn't have off-flavors due to our poor procedure. There is the conditioning phase and it's really going to be dependent on all the standard variables (time, temperature, pitch rate, gravity, mash, etc) and so is highly recipe dependent. That's kind of the gray area in that there is really no hard and fast rule, but it becomes more concrete as a recipe is developed. So the question in my mind is "how far do you take it"? I guess there are many brewers who have no interest in tweaking and optimizing those processes, and have found something that "works" and in many cases just doesn't happen to be a detriment. But the idea that you have to go 4 weeks is pure nonsense.

On the other side of the coin, my friend Phil (who has done things like used an osmotic membrane to keep the yeast separate from the wort...he gave me some of the stuff and the beer which was "done" in about 2 or 3 days) is beginning to believe that there is a "homebrew" flavor as a result of excessive time on the cake.

I would be interested in understanding how the processes carry out once racked from the cake. I am supposing that any yeast still left in suspension are more than sufficient and numerous to finalize the conditioning as long as temperatures are kept from dropping them out too soon.

[Beezy]

The thing that pisses me off is as a noob I am trying to do things the best I can to get the best results but you get so much conflicting information. If you are trying to clear your beer specifically I can see why you might leave it longer. As far as the yeast cleaning up after themselves I have heard it takes a day or 2 max and other claim it takes weeks. I am starting to feel like there is this obsession with things taking longer. Like people want it to take longer than necessary. So I have been going 3 weeks. I don't know if it's right but eventually I will know if I should go more or less. 3 weeks has been good for me tho.

[PseudoChef]

The thing that pisses me off is as a noob I am trying to do things the best I can to get the best results but you get so much conflicting information. If you are trying to clear your beer specifically I can see why you might leave it longer. As far as the yeast cleaning up after themselves I have heard it takes a day or 2 max and other claim it takes weeks. I am starting to feel like there is this obsession with things taking longer. Like people want it to take longer than necessary. So I have been going 3 weeks. I don't know if it's right but eventually I will know if I should go more or less. 3 weeks has been good for me tho.

This is where the problem lies. I think people are interpreting off flavors as fermentation byproducts, but there's difference. Another stab in the dark I have for my argument are unrefined palates from new brewers leading them to not exactly know what they are tasting (which ties into off flavors vs. byproducts).

As has been said time and time again, have the correct amount of healthy yeast, ferment at the correct temperature, and have excellent sanitation. Following those, you shouldn't have off flavors that you need to clean up.

[Beezy]

Tasting my worts I really haven't had off flavors. Maybe there will be with the one in the primary because of temp issues but I couldn't taste any just from the sample. I have been wondering what this green / apple flavor is because I haven't gotten that even while it's still fermenting.

[zoebisch01]

Again I see another set of ideas emerging. One is using the crutch (of time) to help off flavor clean up, which in reality is a result of not following good process rules. The other idea is merely leaving the beer on the yeast to allow some conditioning time which does not refer to off-flavors but other chemical and biological processes occurring, all of which i do not know but do know they are taking place. The issues inherent in both of these concepts overlap and are confused because it could be one or the other....if that makes sense? So it's probably best for homebrewers giving advice on this topic to address the issue of which reasoning they are following when telling somebody to leave the beer on the cake.

That all being said (back to your OP), I think the 'right' way to view it is to leave beer that has been well taken care of (proper process) on the yeast until fermentation is complete and then rack it. And if the beer has gone amiss, then the individual can be directed to see if the yeast will clean up the mistake(s) and to give note that "next time you want to do this....or refrain from such" (i.e. correct the process mistake). And lastly that "some" extra time on the cake shouldn't hurt...but like I mention my friend who has been really rocking the comps lately feels that going too long on a cake will produce some detrimental effects (and no, not autolysis which occurs all the time actually :D).

A big part of the problem, which Beezy is experiencing is that there seems to be little or no (to my knowledge) sort of table, time chart, etc that can really tell us the "when". Only big places start getting into that realm of predictability and control. Granted you can get pretty damned close once you are familiar with the process but in terms of specific time frames that's both related to how well you can control the process itself and much less to do with the actual fluctuations of the living organisms.

[PseudoChef]

I remember interviewing the brewmaster at Blue Mountain and he told me that he once assisted in developing this method of fermentation where the wort was sent down a long series of troughs that were covered/impregnated with yeast. The high yeast-to-liquid surface ratio meant that by the time it reached the end of the troughs (which took a matter of minutes), fermentation was done. That's some shit.

I don't really think he helped develop it since it's rather old, but continuous fermentation is definitely not unheard of. Maybe improving(?) it for the minutes you quote. Some googling pulled up this interesting pdf (http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/food/6A.pdf) which states 40-120 hours for complete fermentation.

[Ó Flannagáin]

What I take away from PC's point is what I've learned from personal experience.

Experience 1) Every time I brew a hefeweizen its ready to drink in less than 10 days... it ferments quick and a little warm and I don't have to wait for the yeast to completely drop.

Experience 2) WHen brewing in New York with a garage at 60 degrees F, I have quite a few ambers and smaller IPAs that were brewed with a proper starter on tap within 3 weeks and drinking by 4 at the latest. Smooth, tasty and fresh.

[Lamppa]

I would like to chime in here and say that I feel each beer is ready in its own time and a time table is going to be generic and vague.

Yeast choice will effect timetable greatly as we know in dealing with hefe.

Gravity is another huge factor to consider. Any bill regardless of style, in the range of 1. 080 will not be drinkable in 10 days. Even if you brewed a hefe style and waaay overshot gravity at, say 1.065 you wouldn't drink at 10 days. We all know these things.

Experience witg each yeast and style and temp etc etc, is the only way to know, really, imo.

[Lerxst]

Sure, if you are brewing sub-par beer and need to age out off flavors (some, which I'm convinced, aren't going anywhere - I'm looking at you, phenolics). How about this? Brew beer that doesn't have off flavors to begin with, and have your beer ready for packaging around 10 days or so. Show me a professional brewer that is having his or her beer sit in the fermentor for a month.

Sorry, but I'm starting to see this crop up in almost every single homebrew discussion I read nowadays and it's starting to piss me off.

Show me a professional brewer that 1) doesn't employ controls over fermentation and 2) doesnt see time as money and can afford to let beer sit around instead of selling it? Production brewery techniques and schedules don't always translate, especially when the brewer doesn't understand the reasoning behind half of it.

You're right in essence though, if you brew a beer with the proper pitch rate, proper wort factors and proper temp control there isn't much for the yeast to clean up post fermentation. But if we are honest, how many of us really hit all those points with our brewing? Few considering our frequent posts on these topics. How many struggle with healthy controlled fermentation?

I think its a valid general guideline for new brewers, especially those who don't follow these points and more anxious to drink some homebrew than take a simple gravity reading; its a safety net, not a commandment

[Ó Flannagáin]

Show me a professional brewer that 1) doesn't employ controls over fermentation and 2) doesnt see time as money and can afford to let beer sit around instead of selling it? Production brewery techniques and schedules don't always translate, especially when the brewer doesn't understand the reasoning behind half of it.

You're right in essence though, if you brew a beer with the proper pitch rate, proper wort factors and proper temp control there isn't much for the yeast to clean up post fermentation. But if we are honest, how many of us really hit all those points with our brewing? Few considering our frequent posts on these topics. How many struggle with healthy controlled fermentation?

I think its a valid general guideline for new brewers, especially those who don't follow these points and more anxious to drink some homebrew than take a simple gravity reading; its a safety net, not a commandment

When I was hanging out with Tim at Empire Brew Co. a lot I watched his brewing from beginning to tap and let me tell you, his process was incredibly similar to homebrewing (but with badass equipment!). Crush grains in giant crusher, mash in giant masher, boil, cool and transfer to giant fermenter, let it ferment for a couple weeks, transfer to kegs. No crazy control, just temp control on the fermentation. He just dumped the yeast in out of a giant bucket, no wierd infusion or anything.

[zoebisch01]

I think, if I am reading correctly, is what PC was/is saying is that specifically wrt off-flavors induced from bad procedure that it seems the common advice is just to "leave the beer on the cake for 4 weeks" and that will solve everything. The point I am bringing to the surface is that along with this I believe much confusion exists because there are indeed other sound reasons to allow the beer to rest....but to what point the beer actually needs to be on the cake is really still very much done "by feel".

[Lerxst]

When I was hanging out with Tim at Empire Brew Co. a lot I watched his brewing from beginning to tap and let me tell you, his process was incredibly similar to homebrewing (but with badass equipment!). Crush grains in giant crusher, mash in giant masher, boil, cool and transfer to giant fermenter, let it ferment for a couple weeks, transfer to kegs. No crazy control, just temp control on the fermentation. He just dumped the yeast in out of a giant bucket, no wierd infusion or anything.

Many brewpubs are similar to monster homebreweries but when you talk to guys (like the brewers at iron hill), they are monitoring & measuring all the along the process and stick to high pitch rates and temp control, all the things we're talking about. Sure, some pro brewers just wing it too.

[Lamppa]

Yes, that term "feel" is a bit lack-lustered, but yeah, that's what I'm saying.

[Lerxst]

I think, if I am reading correctly, is what PC was/is saying is that specifically wrt off-flavors induced from bad procedure that it seems the common advice is just to "leave the beer on the cake for 4 weeks" and that will solve everything. The point I am bringing to the surface is that along with this I believe much confusion exists because there are indeed other sound reasons to allow the beer to rest....but to what point the beer actually needs to be on the cake is really still very much done "by feel".

Agreed

[blacklab]

For a mid range O.G. ale, four weeks is way too long. Two weeks then bottle / keg, I usually go less, sometimes even 4-5 days. Another point is that you don't have to bulk age unless you've got the beer sitting with spices or some other such thing. Even if it's a huge strong ale, once fermentation is complete you can still bottle and let it age rather than in a carboy/keg.

[Evan!]

I don't really think he helped develop it since it's rather old, but continuous fermentation is definitely not unheard of. Maybe improving(?) it for the minutes you quote. Some googling pulled up this interesting pdf (http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/food/6A.pdf) which states 40-120 hours for complete fermentation.

Something like that. The interview was a couple-three years ago or so.

[BlindLemonLars]

I'm a big fan of leaving beer in primary for extended periods, but I've never made the claim that it somehow improves the beer or corrects off flavors. Just that there is no written-in-stone schedule that must be adhered to, that beer will clear just as quickly in primary as it will in a secondary vessel and that autolysis is essentially a myth in typical homebrewing scenarios. Generally I'll only bring it up in response to a newbie who seems to be obsessed about racking to secondary after a set period of time or when "the bubbling has slowed down," merely because the shoddy, dumbed-down instructions that came with their kit said so.

Frankly, I wince when I read "let the yeast clean up after themselves." There is an element of truth to it, but it sounds so Pollyanna...as though yeast are these little conscientious organisms that tidy up any mess they make, so long as you give them enough time.

[Evan!]

I think, if I am reading correctly, is what PC was/is saying is that specifically wrt off-flavors induced from bad procedure that it seems the common advice is just to "leave the beer on the cake for 4 weeks" and that will solve everything.

Yeah, well, I think that the reason that sentiment took such hold in the first place is because there were and continue to be tons of novices inundating forums with threads like "my beer is not great, should I dump it?", and so shitbirds like revtard create 1200-word sticky threads trying to tell these people not to dump their beer (which is not necessarily bad advice in and of itself), and that "time heals all wounds" (which is absolute horseshit). It's just a gross overreaction to the propensity of novices to panic after a few days. I recently saw something like this pop up on /r/homebrewing. Annoys the shit out of me.

[salad 419]

I let things age because I'm lazy.
I typically wait 3 weeks to bottle/keg.
That said, I've left some sit for a year and a half, two years, ten weeks. I've also made a beer and bottled it on day 4. Most of the batch was gone by day 10.
I'm not wanting to say that I make GREAT beer or SHITTY beer, but do think that at least a week after primary fermentation has completed gives a decent amount of conditioning.
I also agree that "clean up after themselves" isn't exactly what's going on, but it dumbs it down. We all agree that after fermentation, the yeast store reserves before going dormant. So, they clean up flavors as a side effect.

Hefe's, APA's, IPA's I tend to "rush" and may only wait two weeks.

I would think that larger scale brewing does have a different "rate of progress" than our 5 and 10 gallon batches, but follows a similar "schedule of events". I would agree that the bigger breweries would want the tank empty so they can keep up with their production schedule. Time is money.

[zoebisch01]

Yes, that term "feel" is a bit lack-lustered, but yeah, that's what I'm saying.

If we get to the point where we can measure some more of these processes in a cheap and effective way, which I fully believe that eventually it will (ceteris paribus), we will see a greater degree of control possible and even more than that you won't just be "feeling" it out but actually measuring some of these things that go on. Not to get BLL upset, but yes reportedly (if Palmer and some others are correct) the yeast do in fact "clean up". What it is they are cleaning up in terms of an exhaustive list I have never seen, and I am not sure outside of say like Anheiser Busch that people are doing it. Someday there will be little hand held meters that, like we use a hydrometer, will be able to detect, measure and possibly provide critical feedback to the brewer information about the chemical and physical state of the beer. I can so see this happening, if the market ever demands it and innovations are made.

All of these things say something about the beer. All of these aspects are measurable or rather can be measurable if someone comes along with a fundamental understanding and the know-how.

[BlindLemonLars]

I let things age because I'm lazy.

That's my primary motivation as well! I'm not going to let my hobby dictate my schedule to me. It helps that I don't get much opportunity to brew, and I don't really consume that much beer either.

That being said, yesterday I re-plumbed my brewstand to use propane so I hope to be brewing again right quick!

[zoebisch01]

Here's where a lot of it comes from (I believe):

"
Chapter 8 - Fermentation

8.2.3 Secondary or Conditioning Phase

The reactions that take place during the conditioning phase are primarily a function of the yeast. The vigorous primary stage is over, the majority of the wort sugars have been converted to alcohol, and a lot of the yeast cells are going dormant - but some are still active.
The Secondary Phase allows for the slow reduction of the remaining fermentables. The yeast have eaten most all of the easily fermentable sugars and now start to turn their attention elsewhere. The yeast start to work on the heavier sugars like maltotriose. Also, the yeast clean up some of the byproducts they produced during the fast-paced primary phase. But this stage has its dark side too.
Under some conditions, the yeast will also consume some of the compounds in the trub. The "fermentation" of these compounds can produce several off-flavors. In addition, the dormant yeast on the bottom of the fermentor begin excreting more amino and fatty acids. Leaving the post-primary beer on the trub and yeast cake for too long (more than about three weeks) will tend to result in soapy flavors becoming evident. Further, after very long times the yeast begin to die and break down - autolysis, which produces yeasty or rubbery/fatty/meaty flavors and aromas. For these reasons, it can be important to get the beer off of the trub and dormant yeast during the conditioning phase.
There has been a lot of controversy within the homebrewing community on the value of racking beers, particularly ales, to secondary fermentors. Many seasoned homebrewers have declared that there is no real taste benefit and that the dangers of contamination and the cost in additional time are not worth what little benefit there may be. While I will agree that for a new brewer's first, low gravity, pale beer that the risks probably outweigh the benefits; I have always argued that through careful transfer, secondary fermentation is beneficial to nearly all beer styles. But for now, I will advise new brewers to only use a single fermentor until they have gained some experience with racking and sanitation.
Leaving an ale beer in the primary fermentor for a total of 2-3 weeks (instead of just the one week most canned kits recommend), will provide time for the conditioning reactions and improve the beer. This extra time will also let more sediment settle out before bottling, resulting in a clearer beer and easier pouring. And, three weeks in the primary fermentor is usually not enough time for off-flavors to occur."


source (http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter8-2-3.html).



Since the conditioning phase does begin during the attenuative phase (just sounds like natural life cycles going on...i.e. some are ahead of others, yeast that is) I would imagine that at some point the yeast have reduced out sufficient fermentation by-products and so it's most likely that there is typically a gaussian distribution of "good enough" wrt time in terms of conditioning. None of this is linear and all of it is complex in terms of the actual inner workings but suffice it to say at the end of the day your beer will benefit from some time conditioning and I don't think there is any getting around this.



The benefit of extended conditioning can actually be lost on a long enough time-line and on the other hand insufficient conditioning will give you a totally different set of problems.


That all being said, anybody see they are remaking "Total Recall"?

[blacklab]

If the remaining yeast are munching on leftover fermentables, why don't we see anything on hydrometer? Back when I used to secondary, I don't think I ever saw a reading go down after primary.

Get your ass to Mars.

[Lamppa]

My beers drop (this is just example numbers) from 1.042 to 1.014 in 4 days, then after 10 more days it will be 1.012.
This has been typical I'm my testing, but here is the missing piece, I don't test in the middle, so it happens somewhere between day 5 and 14

[Steve Urquell]

I agree with the "feel" statement. The beer will be done when it's done. When it has dropped clear, and tastes good, then it's done. That's where new brewers are at a disadvantage--they just don't know what done tastes like yet.

Many new brewers are brewing a style of beer that they have never even tasted, so of course they won't know what it's supposed to taste like when finished.

[zoebisch01]

why don't we see anything on hydrometer?

I would venture a guess, because it's doing this (N being total fermentables in this case, tau is influenced by a combination of yeast attenuative properties and temperature mainly):


http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/f/2/3f28b1c0d4362b86a89f976d83d81070.png

Most likely, at that point in time, it is changing beyond the sensitivity of your hydrometer reading error measurement. (decaying exponential). For all intents and purposes probably 98/99% of the fermentables are consumed. The question becomes, is this negligible on the outcome? In terms of gravity I'd say so, but in terms of anything noticeable I'd say this part:

" Also, the yeast clean up some of the byproducts they produced during the fast-paced primary phase."

would have more of an impact on overall beer health. It's all splitting hairs though, and like I said without a way to actually measure these things we won't know, which is why I say it's done by "feel".

[Evan!]

I never edit other people's posts, but I make an exception for "for all intensive purposes" :D

[salad 419]

I never edit other people's posts, but I make an exception for "for all intensive purposes" :D

Where's the English Grammar Police when you need him?
JEEEESH

[blacklab]

I never edit other people's posts, but I make an exception for "for all intensive purposes" :D

One of my old bosses always used to say, "Let's get down to pacifics". It gave me those eye twitches that you can feel but can't see.

[Beezy]

Infants and porpoises?

[PseudoChef]

To bad you couldn't of stealth edited that sumbitch.

Yes, I know it's couldn't have. That's the joke.

[Lamppa]

Hahahahaha that is the funniest post ever.

[Lamppa]

The best part is that the thread derailed, just like always, and everyonen jumPped ina dn will laugh

[zoebisch01]

I never edit other people's posts, but I make an exception for "for all intensive purposes" :D

Never actually thought about it. Thx for the correction.

[zoebisch01]

The best part is that the thread derailed, just like always, and everyonen jumPped ina dn will laugh
Who's laughing. I'm sitting in Evan's! hedge waiting to stab his eyes out with a blunt spoon.

[Evan!]

Who's laughing. I'm sitting in Evan's! hedge waiting to stab his eyes out with a blunt spoon.

I'm doing the world a service. Don't blame me because you never graduated 5th grade! ;)

[Ó Flannagáin]

Grade 9 bitch!

[blacklab]

Who's laughing. I'm sitting in Evan's! hedge waiting to stab his eyes out with a blunt spoon.

So you're saying there's a bustle in his hedgerow?

[zoebisch01]

So you're saying there's a bustle in his hedgerow?

It's just a spring clean for the may queen

[PseudoChef]

I'm kegging a beer after a week, bitches! Suck on it!

[Evan!]

Yay, it's a race and you won!

[Common]

I didn't read much of this, but I usually tell new brewers to just primary 3 or 4 weeks, then bottle. Since it's much easier and it will definitely be done fermenting by then. I've had great beer 11 days grains to glass.

[PseudoChef]

Yay, it's a race and you won!

'Bout damn time.

[marzen41]

great topic guys. i think all of the experienced homebrewers here know there are no hard and fast rules for fermentation. most of us know when our beer is ready to package. revvy,s rant makes me want to rip his balls off and feed them to the dogs each beer is different and takes it's own time, i prefer fresh beer so i will usually be drinking at three weeks or less, but , that is not all my beers or some kind of stupid arbitrary rule you have to follow. and if one more smuck tells me it takes 2 to 3 weeks for yeast to {clean up after themselves} i will be impolite

[Beezy]

I have been researching this a bit. Seems cold crashing is the key to get them done quick. I can't do that right now. One other thing is I have been sampling my bottled beers as soon as 5 days after bottling and they seem well carbonated to me. The one batch I finished off before 3 weeks was up lol. It seems like people have a lot of pride in their patience but it's not necessary as far as I can tell. I just had commercial mead that was started in March. Tasted good to me.

[GamesterX]

Grade 9 bitch!
It's OK Rickey! you'll get your grade 10 someday!!!!!

[Lerxst]

I have been researching this a bit. Seems cold crashing is the key to get them done quick. I can't do that right now. One other thing is I have been sampling my bottled beers as soon as 5 days after bottling and they seem well carbonated to me. The one batch I finished off before 3 weeks was up lol. It seems like people have a lot of pride in their patience but it's not necessary as far as I can tell. I just had commercial mead that was started in March. Tasted good to me.

How does your research indicate that cold crashing is the key?
Crashing the beer will cause yeast and haze to fall out of suspension. This is important for clarity & also would cut down on excessively yeasty flavors versus serving a beer that still had a lot of yeast floating around. Many strains will floc on their own with time but crashing accelerates the process. Either way, it's one part of the big picture of beer quality; if you're not brewing "clean" and fermenting clean, crashing isn't going to help that I'm aware of.

[Boomhauer]

As to the OP, I was stressing myself over this issue a couple of days ago. I'm brewing an Ale with 005 yeast and the yeast flocculated after 4 days. For 3 days I didn't know what to do, then following some good advice I agitated the fermenter and fermentation was done in 2 days. Had I known what to do in the beginning my fermentation would have been done in 6 days hypothetically. I decided to stop stressing over it and I let it sit for 2 days, the crash cooled it for two days (my wife isn't happy about me cleaning out the frig to make room for the 6 gallon bucket). I warmed up a sample last night in a glass and tasted it and it's great beer! I'll be bottling tomorrow right on schedule.

As a new brewer, all this conflicting information about fermentation lengths has caused me to suspect almost all information as false. I feel like I'm back at square one again figuring it out on my own.

[PseudoChef]

And that's exactly what I have learned. Figure it out on your own. I used the Scottish Ale 1728 on this beer - highly flocculent. I pitched around 64 degrees last Thursday and left to go out of town Saturday morning (still around 64). When I came back Wednesday night, krausen dropped, beer from 1.057 to 1.010. Tasted it - a little hot (ferm temps most likely rose the days I was out), but no butter, no apple, no incomplete fermentation, and the yeast had already dropped. Didn't wind up kegging it last night 'cause I had something else come up, but I will tonight. The whole point really is that Pops is coming into town next Wednesday, and wanted something other than a Wit and a Bretted beer for him to drink.

[Steve Urquell]

As a new brewer, all this conflicting information about fermentation lengths has caused me to suspect almost all information as false. I feel like I'm back at square one again figuring it out on my own.

It's not false. It's just that all fermentations are different. There are so many variables involved that you could split the same yeast starter and same wort, sit them them next to each other in separate containers and have different results from each batch.

What this thread is addressing is the increasing length of fermentation time being suggested to new brewers from a couple of retards on another forum. One very vocal retard keeps lengthening his time and a few sycophants echo the BS as if it were gospel. The count now is to let your beer sit for "one month in primary--and if you don't, then you're not making good beer!!!"

As stated, all fermentations are different so let your common sense, and taste buds, tell you when the beer is done--not some "set in stone" timeline.

[PseudoChef]

It's not false. It's just that all fermentations are different. There are so many variables involved that you could split the same yeast starter and same wort, sit them them next to each other in separate containers and have different results from each batch.

What this thread is addressing is the increasing length of fermentation time being suggested to new brewers from a couple of retards on another forum. One very vocal retard keeps lengthening his time and a few sycophants echo the BS as if it were gospel.

I see what you did there.

[Evan!]

What this thread is addressing is the increasing length of fermentation time being suggested to new brewers from a couple of retards on another forum. One very vocal retard keeps lengthening his time and a few sycophants echo the BS as if it were gospel. The count now is to let your beer sit for "one month in primary--and if you don't, then you're not making good beer!!!"

There's that, and there's also this pile of misinformative tripe (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/never-dump-your-beer-patience-virtue-time-heals-all-things-even-beer-73254/).


Never dump your beer, ever ever ever! Even if it tastes like rancid goat semen! Time heals all things! Have patience, no matter how illogical! If your beer sucks, don't bother trying to figure out why it sucks, just age it for awhile and somehow sweet little baby jesus will fix it with his magic wand!

He should be smote for that post alone.

[Beezy]

How does your research indicate that cold crashing is the key?
Crashing the beer will cause yeast and haze to fall out of suspension. This is important for clarity & also would cut down on excessively yeasty flavors versus serving a beer that still had a lot of yeast floating around. Many strains will floc on their own with time but crashing accelerates the process. Either way, it's one part of the big picture of beer quality; if you're not brewing "clean" and fermenting clean, crashing isn't going to help that I'm aware of.

Right, my post was assuming you did everything else right or as close to possible. I am saying because I can't cold crash I still have to leave my beer for 3 weeks.

[DonkeyShoes]

There's that, and there's also this pile of misinformative tripe (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/never-dump-your-beer-patience-virtue-time-heals-all-things-even-beer-73254/).



He should be smote for that post alone.

Reverend Herp Derp lol
http://i.imgur.com/A78JC.jpg

[PseudoChef]

There's that, and there's also this pile of misinformative tripe (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/never-dump-your-beer-patience-virtue-time-heals-all-things-even-beer-73254/).



He should be smote for that post alone.

Spreads like the plague. (http://www.reddit.com/r/Homebrewing/comments/jnvgk/time_cures_all_my_125yr_fermented_oktoberfest/)

[Steve Urquell]

I have found the reason for keeping the beer in the fermenter for a month. See, you pitch/ferment at 85F and the beer gets done faster. http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/should-i-pour-down-sink-262294/

The 4 weeks is to let the estery shit taste great, cause, like, time heals all things.

So, pitch/ferment hot for the speed of the ferment, then let it sit for a month "to let the yeast clean up after itself"

[PseudoChef]

I have found the reason for keeping the beer in the fermenter for a month. See, you pitch/ferment one vial or smack pack at 85F and the beer gets done faster. http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/should-i-pour-down-sink-262294/

The 4 weeks is to let the estery shit taste great, cause, like, time heals all things.

So, pitch/ferment hot for the speed of the ferment, then let it sit for a month "to let the yeast clean up after itself"

Don't forget that. I saw a post today where someone was pretty adamant about 1L starters being fine and that the pitching rate calculator was too confusing.

[Beezy]

I have found the reason for keeping the beer in the fermenter for a month. See, you pitch/ferment at 85F and the beer gets done faster. http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/should-i-pour-down-sink-262294/

The 4 weeks is to let the estery shit taste great, cause, like, time heals all things.

So, pitch/ferment hot for the speed of the ferment, then let it sit for a month "to let the yeast clean up after itself"

lul

[Steve Urquell]

That is really a disservice to new brewers. The 4 week thing is being pushed ad naseum while improper brewing/pitching/fermenting temps and technique is being reinforced as OK.

I think new brewers think they can do everything wrong, and letting the beer sit in the fermenter will fix it--and that's what's being preached FFS!

[Evan!]

Spreads like the plague. (http://www.reddit.com/r/Homebrewing/comments/jnvgk/time_cures_all_my_125yr_fermented_oktoberfest/)

Ugh. Yes, because one successful attempt equals a scientific fucking study.


If you're sad about your beers, let them sit a little longer, all will be cured!

No. If you're "sad about your beers", try to figure out why they suck, don't just count on some magical force to cure them with aging. The fact that you had one beer that sucked and you lagered it for over a year and it got better does not extrapolate into fuckall. r/homebrewing, Y U No use logic?

[Beezy]

Mr Papazian created a monster with his phrase.

[PseudoChef]

Ugh. Yes, because one successful attempt equals a scientific fucking study.



No. If you're "sad about your beers", try to figure out why they suck, don't just count on some magical force to cure them with aging. The fact that you had one beer that sucked and you lagered it for over a year and it got better does not extrapolate into fuckall. r/homebrewing, Y U No use logic?

Douche didn't even lager it. It sat in his garage for a year. I'm suuure that's tasty. And remember, watery beer with shitty head is amazing!

[Lerxst]

Right, my post was assuming you did everything else right or as close to possible. I am saying because I can't cold crash I still have to leave my beer for 3 weeks.

Just use a highly floc strain and cold crashing or longer time won't be necessary

[Beezy]

Just use a highly floc strain and cold crashing or longer time won't be necessary

If that's what I want to use. I haven't used a flocculant strain yet tbh. Maybe next brew.

[Evan!]

Douche didn't even lager it. It sat in his garage for a year. I'm suuure that's tasty. And remember, watery beer with shitty head is amazing!

Yeah, I read further...it's watery, but amazing! And then some other r/homebrew tool came to his defense because for some reason people in these kinds of subreddits don't like to rock the boat, they just want everyone to backslap and smile. I'm sorry, but there are a fucking TON of great beers out there, both in and outside of my brewery...and "watery" is not a descriptor I'd use on any of them, because "watery" is a major flaw, and if it's got a major flaw, then how the fuck is it "amazing"? Christ...

At least the OP and his defender backed off a little bit and changed their statement from "time heals all" to "under certain circumstances, aging may make a bad beer less bad". Yeah, no shit, really?

[Evan!]

Don't forget that. I saw a post today where someone was pretty adamant about 1L starters being fine and that the pitching rate calculator was too confusing.

Fuck, if the whole "X cells per Y amount of fermentables" concept is "too complicated" for you (or, failing that, just using Mr. Malty's stupid-simple widget), then it might be time to hang up your homebrewing hat for a little while and go back and get your grade 9. Goddamnit, few things are more annoying than useless layabouts who want to brew beer without thinking.

[salad 419]

Goddamnit, few things are more annoying than useless layabouts who want to brew beer without thinking.

Why'd you have to go and bring me into this??

[BlindLemonLars]

Originally Posted by Reverend Herp Derp
If your beer sucks, don't bother trying to figure out why it sucks, just age it for awhile and somehow sweet little baby jesus will fix it with his magic wand!

I always thought He was more of a wine maker.

[Dale]

I always thought He was more of a wine maker.

That, and he could make a killer fish sandwich.

[Joos]

I Think everyone is missing the obvious point here......The OP is Dbag.

[PseudoChef]

I Think everyone is missing the obvious point here......The OP is Dbag.

Wait, there's people who haven't realized this yet?

[mburtis]

i don't think ive ever left a beer in the fermentor more than 3 weeks most of the time i bottle after 2 unless im too busy or am feeling like a lazy fuck. I do believe in bottle conditioning for periods of time tho. Ive had a few beers that were good 3 weeks after bottling but the same beer was fucking amazing 3 months after bottling. Maybe im full of shit there too but it seems to work for me.

[Ó Flannagáin]

Fuck, if the whole "X cells per Y amount of fermentables" concept is "too complicated" for you (or, failing that, just using Mr. Malty's stupid-simple widget), then it might be time to hang up your homebrewing hat for a little while and go back and get your grade 9. Goddamnit, few things are more annoying than useless layabouts who want to brew beer without thinking.

Not that its too complicated, just annoying to try and get the perfect starter for each batch of beer you brew. In my short experiences, a simple starter made 2 or 3 days before brewing works just fine. I think (because I do) that brewing at home doesn't require turning each step into a math problem. But I'm an admitted lazy brewer. I make fine beer that's good and better than cheap beer from the store with my process. I brew to drink these days. I like the whole feeling of drinking my own beer but I'm not a big fan of the brew day itself anymore. Maybe because its so goddam hot here.

[Evan!]

Not that its too complicated, just annoying to try and get the perfect starter for each batch of beer you brew. In my short experiences, a simple starter made 2 or 3 days before brewing works just fine. I think (because I do) that brewing at home doesn't require turning each step into a math problem. But I'm an admitted lazy brewer. I make fine beer that's good and better than cheap beer from the store with my process. I brew to drink these days. I like the whole feeling of drinking my own beer but I'm not a big fan of the brew day itself anymore. Maybe because its so goddam hot here.

Well, to each his own, but I personally don't see what's annoying about plugging your OG into JZ's calculator. I feel you on the brewday thing, during the summer it just sucks to be out there sweating your dick off and then have to go through all kinds of gymnastics just to get the wort down to pitching temps on top of that, and then have to pay closer attention to keeping your fermentation temps from getting too high on top of that...

But come winter...yuh...

[Ó Flannagáin]

Makes me a little sad, I used to be like a kid on Christmas every brew day. Now its kind of a hassle. I think its a mix of heat and the fact that I'm fucking stupid busy right now and to set out 5 hours in a day is a chore in itself. But, still love the reward as much as ever.

[Dale]

It comes and goes with me. I'll go through phases, the longest one being two years, where I just don't want to brew. I'm busy doing other things or just can't be bothered. But that "every brewday is like Christmas" feeling always comes back.

[Evan!]

Makes me a little sad, I used to be like a kid on Christmas every brew day. Now its kind of a hassle. I think its a mix of heat and the fact that I'm fucking stupid busy right now and to set out 5 hours in a day is a chore in itself. But, still love the reward as much as ever.

I still love me a brewday, but it really does get exhausting sometimes. I was all set to brew a tripel last Saturday, had the starter chilling...then I woke up that morning and just didn't have the motivation. I still have that starter in my fridge.

[PseudoChef]

Not that its too complicated, just annoying to try and get the perfect starter for each batch of beer you brew. In my short experiences, a simple starter made 2 or 3 days before brewing works just fine. I think (because I do) that brewing at home doesn't require turning each step into a math problem. But I'm an admitted lazy brewer. I make fine beer that's good and better than cheap beer from the store with my process. I brew to drink these days. I like the whole feeling of drinking my own beer but I'm not a big fan of the brew day itself anymore. Maybe because its so goddam hot here.

Nah, dude. This guy was referring to how just using the application was difficult - not the process of making a starter. Like those complicated drop-down menus and slider bars was too much for him to handle. Since you write software (heck, even wrote an app yourself), I'm pretty sure that part doesn't send you into herp derp brain convulsions.


I still love me a brewday, but it really does get exhausting sometimes. I was all set to brew a tripel last Saturday, had the starter chilling...then I woke up that morning and just didn't have the motivation. I still have that starter in my fridge.

Right there with you. They did used to feel like Xmas all the time - I would psyche myself up all day for it, the joy of going to the homebrew store - all that shit. Now it does feel like a chore sometimes. I am trying to find the happy medium - I dropped back down to 5 gallon batches so I can brew inside where it isn't so hot. But I got so used to doing the same amount of work for twice as much beer, 5 gallons just feels like a chore. I also hated having half a weekend day just taken, so I started brewing on weeknights, and that has been fun. Have everything measured out the night before, and alls I have to do when I come home is flip on the burner and go to town.

[Beezy]

Interesting stuff. I equate it more with having sex with a new girlfriend. Eventually you are like, just let me go to bed but for me I am at the walking around with a boner all the time stage. I guess the answer to this phenom is upgrading your set up to the point of automation and everything. My system is ghetto and drawn out but I am enjoying it none the less.

[Steve Urquell]

Picked up this tidbit from the "tard" himself educating a new brewer. Lulz.

" DON'T SMELL YOUR WORT...OR TASTEIT.

It means NOTHING.Itdoesn't reallymatterwhat a beertastesor smellslike halfway through fermentation, most of mine taste like ****...so I don't bother tasting them at that point. And I suggest to new brewers to do likewise, or else they start threads like this...because it's not halfway through fermentation that is a representation of the finished product....it's after the beer has been carbed and conditioned for about 6 weeks, that is an accurate representation of what a beer tastes like."

[ohiobrewtus]

Picked up this tidbit from the "tard" himself educating a new brewer. Lulz.

" DON'T SMELL YOUR WORT...OR TASTEIT.

It means NOTHING.Itdoesn't reallymatterwhat a beertastesor smellslike halfway through fermentation, most of mine taste like ****...so I don't bother tasting them at that point. And I suggest to new brewers to do likewise, or else they start threads like this...because it's not halfway through fermentation that is a representation of the finished product....it's after the beer has been carbed and conditioned for about 6 weeks, that is an accurate representation of what a beer tastes like."

I'm SO glad I stopped going there.

[Steve Urquell]

That's what's so great about this place. If someone says some stupid shit like that, it gets handled pdq

[RedBeard]

I'm SO glad I stopped going there.

I go there once in a blue moon to see if someone else has tried something random I thought of, bc it's usually the first discussion of it I find with a google search. But it seems like every time I'm just like damn this is annoying to sift through. I honestly can't browse that site for more than 30 sec without getting either pissed off or bored. I don't know how some of you had thousands of posts there honestly

[PseudoChef]

So I did a site-specific search for HBT using "And I suggest to new brewers to do likewise, or else they start threads like this" as the queued term. It returned 126 results. Assuming some of those are quoted replies, but still - he's copy-pasta'd that response at, I would guess a minimum, of 40 or so ish times. Holy hell.

[Rattfink]

My rule of thumb is two weeks, and that's just to make sure I don't overcarb my bottles and have 'sploders. I'm bottling a wheat beer at 9 days today because the yeast (WY 3068) fermented that shit in 72 hours and it is now plenty clear. I observe more benefit from longer conditioning the second time around in the bottle than I do in the carboy.

That being said, I have left lager in a carboy at about 60 degrees for a month and there was no problem.

[Steve Urquell]

Came across the following gem and thought I'd share. How the fuck can someone keep brewing batch after shitty batch for years without searching a little deeper into how to make better beer?These fools are the justified basis for the BWW commercial. Some good advice on controlling ferm temps followed by--Be Patient! Seriously, be patient to a guy waiting 6 months for his shitty beer to age out the shitty off flavors he put into the beer by allowing it to ferment at 85 degrees.

"Been brewin' off and on for many years... every beer I make must sit for a while- like 4-6 months before it loses its weird flavors- they always come out with a little medicine/alcohol, slight off flavor...haven't paid much attention to fermentation temps- usually out it in the garage in the summer/spring/fall...I usually put a full pouch of yeast in a batch...transfer to secondary after 3-5 days...I usually leave in secondary for a long time- sometimes I rack again..."

[Beezy]

I think people would rather believe conventional wisdom blindly than seek at true answers to their problems. Also maybe it's that while "don't worry" bullshit. It's like taken as "fuck it".

[PseudoChef]

Some guy on reddit tried to tell me that Jamil recommends letting your beer sit in the fermentor for a month, minimum. Homebrewing forums can be like an elementary game of "Telephone" with how information gets so disconcerted.

[wildwest450]

I'm seriously considering entering my Lite Lager in a comp. Brewed, fermented(with a d-rest), slow chilled, lagered and carbed for a week. Brewed 12/14 has to be in the mail by January 8th. How is that possible?:confused:

[ohiobrewtus]

I'm seriously considering entering my Lite Lager in a comp. Brewed, fermented(with a d-rest), slow chilled, lagered and carbed for a week. Brewed 12/14 has to be in the mail by January 8th. How is that possible?:confused:

You must be an evil wizard. There is no other explanation.

[Beezy]

Well lagering is just a method of clearing no? You could just filter it instead. I can't wait to try some lagers. My wine cellar is about the right temp right now.

[wildwest450]

I shall turn my newly acquired wizard powers upon those doing one month ferments, and smote them.

[bernerbrau]

Well lagering is just a method of clearing no?

Yes and no.

Two things to realize about lager brewing:

1. A healthy, correctly-sized pitch of lager yeast at the right temperature can still produce diacetyl and acetaldehyde.
2. Only active yeast can reduce diacetyl and acetaldehyde; they do not age out. In fact, they typically worsen with age.

Now, in traditional lagering methods, the yeast are allowed to start around 50F and the temperature is reduced slowly to near-freezing temperatures during active fermentation. Since the yeast are not shocked, they remain active at these cold temperatures, taking their time to reduce these fermentation byproducts as the beer is slowly fermented to completion, while simultaneously cold-crashing and clearing up the beer.

However, most homebrewers choose instead to use a d-rest, which actually speeds up fermentation at the tail-end, waking up the yeast to rapidly eliminate fermentation byproduct instead. In this case, the "lagering" phase is really just cold crashing.