gravity reading is off

So this is my first batch its an English Brown and my OG was right on at 1.040.. I took a reading after a week to see if I'm close to racking my secondary and it was 1.016 this still seems high. Am I still on target to rack at 2 weeks? Just looking for reassurance I didn't screw this up.

What is your FG supposed to be? A week is way too early. I recommend letting it sit for another 2 weeks in primary and then take another reading. No need to secondary here.

+1 just give it 3 weeks and it should be ready to package. Take FG then.

^^ what they said.

1.016 is a perfectly fine FG for that beer, but it may drop another point or two. A 1.040 English brown doesn't need to be racked to a clearing vessel, and can be bottled when clear, usually at about day 14 or so.

The recipe was from a local hb supply it didn't give a fg just the og and says to rack after 2 weeks. Why wouldn't I wanna secondary a brown?

RockyMTbrewer said:

The recipe was from a local hb supply it didn't give a fg just the og and says to rack after 2 weeks. Why wouldn't I wanna secondary a brown?

Click to expand...

its not cool, someone wrote it in a book, people hate to siphon, people like fighting with trub, people like dumping murky first pours, people like to cold crash or use finings.

mostly they like to say secondaries aren't required.
but a 3 week primary only isn't required either.

you can secondary a english brown.

It's your beer you can pretty much do to it what you will... I don't secondary probably never will, you will run some risk during transfer but if your sanitation is spot on it shouldn't be a problem.. On you FG find out what % your yeast attenuates to then figure where your at.

RockyMTbrewer said:

The recipe was from a local hb supply it didn't give a fg just the og and says to rack after 2 weeks. Why wouldn't I wanna secondary a brown?

Click to expand...

Oh, you certainly can! It won't hurt. But since it's only a 1.040 beer, and it's already done, I don't see the advantage either.

A "secondary" is a clearing vessel. It's called a "bright tank" in a brewery. It gives the beer time to clear and condition a bit.

Since this beer is 3.1% ABV, though, and it's a brown so clarity isn't much of an issue at all, I just don't see any need to do so. It can be bottled once it starts to clear.

If you choose to rack to the clearing vessel, you can do so at any time. You don't have to wait to do it, since the beer is finished. When people do use clearing vessels, it's common to rack it after one week.

What Yooper said.

amandabab said:

its not cool, someone wrote it in a book, people hate to siphon, people like fighting with trub, people like dumping murky first pours, people like to cold crash or use finings.

mostly they like to say secondaries aren't required.
but a 3 week primary only isn't required either.

you can secondary a english brown.

Click to expand...

Yes you can, but why? Your beer will clear in the primary after 3 weeks as much as it will after 2 in the primary and 1 in the secondary. Why do more work than you have to. Instead grab a cold one, sit back and relax. or use the secondary to ferment another brew.

I'm still trying to "get" the concept.

Palmer says lower alcohol/gravity beers need/benefit from secondary less than high alcohol/gravity beer.

Why is that?

((is it because low alcohol tend to be clearer any way? In which case, my whacko thinking would conclude they need it *more* because clarity is more important and more expected in a lighter beer.))

What edition are you reading? Lots has been revised since the online first edition including his views on secondarys. He has basically recanted the need for using secondarys.
Also from what I understand many high alcohol beers do benifit from extended aging that can be done in a secondary. Belgian strong ale would be one of those.

If you want to secondary go right ahead. It won't hurt anything...unless you don't sanitize well. I don't do it because I don't need to. Why do something that isn't needed? If you want a clear beer use irish moss, cold condition and use gelatin. You will have crystal clear beer and no need to use a secondary. Just more stuff to sanitize and wash later.

grem135 said:

What edition are you reading?

Click to expand...

1st. Online edition. Hey-- I'm cheap!

Lots has been revised since the online first edition including his views on secondarys. He has basically recanted the need for using secondarys.

Click to expand...

He definitely didn't say they were *needed* even then. But he did say high gravity beers would benefit more from the optional decision than lighter beers would.

So again. Why?

Also from what I understand many high alcohol beers do benifit from extended aging that can be done in a secondary. Belgian strong ale would be one of those.

Click to expand...

Yes. But why? Or does this simply mean that high gravity beers need a longer conditioning period (regardless of what container they do it in)?

Is the reasoning based solely on time? By the time you know a light beer is done fermenting it's pretty much bottling time anyway, whereas a heavy beer will spend a long time conditioning after fermentation so it might as well be in a clean house. (That is if one *does* accept the old-school/pre-secondary train of thought. I'm not trying to decide one way or the other. I'm just trying to *understand* the two sides.)

woozy said:

1st. Online edition. Hey-- I'm cheap!

He definitely didn't say they were *needed* even then. But he did say high gravity beers would benefit more from the optional decision than lighter beers would.

So again. Why?

Yes. But why? Or does this simply mean that high gravity beers need a longer conditioning period (regardless of what container they do it in)?

Is the reasoning based solely on time? By the time you know a light beer is done fermenting it's pretty much bottling time anyway, whereas a heavy beer will spend a long time conditioning after fermentation so it might as well be in a clean house. (That is if one *does* accept the old-school/pre-secondary train of thought. I'm not trying to decide one way or the other. I'm just trying to *understand* the two sides.)

Click to expand...

Big beers tend to have a strong alcohol presence when they are young. Aging mellows that somewhat and allows all the flavors to meld. Bulk aging is more convenient than aging in bottle because the entire batch is consistent. When people talk about aging big beers they're typically talking about 3-6 months minimum. When it sits that long you want to minimize potential for oxidation, therefore you rack to a smaller vessel with less head space.

Small beers tend to be ready to go as soon as they are done, provided proper amounts of yeast were pitched and consistent ferm temps were achieved. You don't age a small beer, so the only benefit of using a secondary is for additional clearing or to add something like fruit. A lot of people here (myself included) don't find much benefit in racking to secondary vs longer primary for clearing. We see it as a potential for introduction of infection and risk of oxidation.

I would divide the idea of "secondary" and "aging" The term secondary tends to be used for non-carbonated beer in a non-serving vessel. A lot can be said on the topic but the gist is that pitching starters, quality sanitation, and good fermentation control reduce the stress on the yeast. Secondary was used to get the fermented beer off the yeast before they started to autolyse. With healthy yeast from good practices, we can leave the beer on the yeast cake longer, letting the remainder of the active yeast (still in solution, kept if you transferred to a secondary) metabolize fusel alcohols and diacetyl in the primary vessel. All that being said, there really is nothing wrong with a secondary and it may be needed if you are planning on dry hoping or adding other things such as fruit to your beer.

The term aging is broader and is typically used for complete beer ready to drink. There are two general types of good aging reactions. Tanins, polyphenols (small tanins...kinda), and other compounds will coagulate and fall out of the beer with time and generally improve flavor. This is best seen in dark, or complex beers with a lot of crystal and roast malt. These beers tend to be bigger so that's one way to generalize that bigger beers benefit from aging. The other way is directly related to high alcohol content beers. That is, fusel alcohols produced during fermentation of high gravity wort. These will undergo esterification reactions with time and become less perceptible thus improving a bigger beer as well.

If you're interested in the details see: How to Brew by Palmer (3rd ed.), Yeast by Zainascheff, or Principles of Brewing Science by Fix. Also, the Brewstrong podcasts with Palmer and JZ are helpful.