Belgian Blonde tastes like Trub

Well, I actually have no idea what trub tastes like but I do know what it smells like. And the Belgian Blonde I brewed up tasted like what trub and/or krausen smells like and it wasn't particularly pleasant. The taste sample was taken between secondary and bottling stages. It lived in the primary for 4 weeks, [tasted a bit sour, or tarty, but still within normal range], secondary for two weeks, [tasted like krausen/trub smells], and has been in bottles for three weeks. Now I haven't checked the taste since I bottled it since it's still carbing, but I'm hoping and praying that a week in the fridge will cure this bizarre off taste.

Has anyone dealt with this in a Belgian before? For reference, it was this kit from Midwest and I used Wyeast Belgian Whitbier #3944 liquid yeast.

Well, I actually have no idea what trub tastes like but I do know what it smells like. And the Belgian Blonde I brewed up tasted like what trub and/or krausen smells like and it wasn't particularly pleasant. The taste sample was taken between secondary and bottling stages. It lived in the primary for 4 weeks, [tasted a bit sour, or tarty, but still within normal range], secondary for two weeks, [tasted like krausen/trub smells], and has been in bottles for three weeks. Now I haven't checked the taste since I bottled it since it's still carbing, but I'm hoping and praying that a week in the fridge will cure this bizarre off taste.

Has anyone dealt with this in a Belgian before? For reference, it was this kit from Midwest and I used Wyeast Belgian Whitbier #3944 liquid yeast. Any chance this fairly nasty off-taste will wain with time?

The problem with saying it tastes like "trub" or smells like "Krauzen" is that they all smell and taste different, based upon what kind of yeast you're using

That's one reason I don't do a 3-4 week primary- I hate the yeast character that is imparted.

Normally, I do a primary for 10-14 days or so until the beer is clear. Sometimes it's longer for a slow fermentation, but I don't ever go 4 weeks.

Do you mean hoppy bitter?

Yooper said:

That's one reason I don't do a 3-4 week primary- I hate the yeast character that is imparted.

Normally, I do a primary for 10-14 days or so until the beer is clear. Sometimes it's longer for a slow fermentation, but I don't ever go 4 weeks.

Click to expand...

Generally, I never go that long either. But in this case I sorta mis-planned another batch and this particular beer got back-logged in the primary for a month. Based on what I have read on this forum, it shouldn't have been a problem. Well, now it is and I know better.

I think conditioning and chilling will improve it.
My very first bottle tasted yeasty because I didn't chill it long enough to make the bad stuff settle. A later bottle had krausen bits floating. They were also subdued by time and cold.
Relax, don't worry.

Upthewazzu said:

Generally, I never go that long either. But in this case I sorta mis-planned another batch and this particular beer got back-logged in the primary for a month. Based on what I have read on this forum, it shouldn't have been a problem. Well, now it is and I know better.

Click to expand...

Lots of brewers on this forum are fans of the long primary. I'm not, but many do prefer the yeast character imparted by more time on the yeast cake. It's just personal preference.

I don't even taste my beers anymore until they are completely carbed and conditioned.

"Young" or "Green" beer tastes like crap, and usually isn't much of an indicator of what it will actually taste like when completely finished conditioning.

Gary

I'll give it at least another week of carbing plus a week after that in the fridge. Hopefully the tasted mellows.

Yooper said:

Lots of brewers on this forum are fans of the long primary. I'm not, but many do prefer the yeast character imparted by more time on the yeast cake. It's just personal preference.

Click to expand...

I am a fan of long primary, and get no extra yeast character from the practice. This is simply incorrect...

Demus said:

I am a fan of long primary, and get no extra yeast character from the practice. This is simply incorrect...

Click to expand...

Really?

I bet you do, but maybe you like the character. To say you get "no extra yeast character" from a month on the yeast cake is unusual because certainly there would be. Like many things, taste is very subjective.

There have been lots of experiments, and it's about 50/50 as far as preference in the long primary/not long primary preferences.

Some people love the flavor and character from long primaries. I'm one of those that don't.

Yooper said:

Really?

I bet you do, but maybe you like the character. To say you get "no extra yeast character" from a month on the yeast cake is unusual because certainly there would be. Like many things, taste is very subjective.

There have been lots of experiments, and it's about 50/50 as far as preference in the long primary/not long primary preferences.

Some people love the flavor and character from long primaries. I'm one of those that don't.

Click to expand...

I would also think that the style would matter here... If one were to brew a wheat beer, I would think that it would benefit from sitting on the yeast cake longer (that has been my experience anyway), as I tend to want wheats (especially Belgian wits) to taste more yeasty. Now if we were talking about a brown ale, IPA, or Pilsner, that would be a different story IMO.

Do mean overly yeasty? If that yeast is slow to floc, that may be the issue. Try giving a bottle at least 3-4 days in the fridge, and report back.

Upthewazzu said:

Generally, I never go that long either. But in this case I sorta mis-planned another batch and this particular beer got back-logged in the primary for a month. Based on what I have read on this forum, it shouldn't have been a problem. Well, now it is and I know better.

Click to expand...

Perhaps this is one good reason to have an extra glass carboy laying around; never hurts to bulk age in a secondary vessel.

BansheeRider said:

Perhaps this is one good reason to have an extra glass carboy laying around; never hurts to bulk age in a secondary vessel.

Click to expand...

Yep, I have an extra one now. It was definitely a lesson learned.

Yeah, definitely tastes very yeasty. I'll stick a couple bottles in the fridge for a week before I taste again.

Give it about 3 weeks in bottles and then refrigerate. When u pour make sure u leave most of the trub on the bottom of the bottle and see how it tastes then. It can mellow and clean up after itself with some good time bottling.

Sadly this is one of those hobbies where time makes everything better, but patience isn't always ur friend.

Yooper said:

Really?

I bet you do, but maybe you like the character. To say you get "no extra yeast character" from a month on the yeast cake is unusual because certainly there would be. Like many things, taste is very subjective.

There have been lots of experiments, and it's about 50/50 as far as preference in the long primary/not long primary preferences.

Some people love the flavor and character from long primaries. I'm one of those that don't.

Click to expand...

While I admit flavor is very subjective, certain facts can't be disputed. Perhaps there are factors that secondary influences the flavor, but settled yeast in the bottom of a primary is just that, settled yeast. It's left behind when I keg or bottle and can not be tasted. The flavor yeast imparts to beer is called, well, beer! As long as you don't stir it up when you serve it there's no additional flavor contribution post fermentation that I've ever noticed or read about. I think there are other flavor differences you may be perceiving and mistakenly believe they are related to beer sitting on a yeast cake. Unless you leave it for months causing autolysis, yeast ABSORB some flavor compounds, not contribute them...

Demus said:

Unless you leave it for months causing autolysis, yeast ABSORB some flavor compounds, not contribute them...

Click to expand...

Semantics. You're both talking about a change in the end product based off how the beer was fermented and left to age/condition. Whether you'd like to consider it an addition or a removal of something is immaterial when it comes to evaluating your preferences between the two. I don't think anyone who's been into brewing long enough will deny there is a subtle difference, in most cases.

You can call semantics if you want, but calling that flavor difference a "yeasty taste" demonstrates a lack of understanding. Great beer can certainly be brewed without fully understanding the process, but this forum is exists to enhance understanding of brewing, so when I read something that's inaccurate, I think it's important to point it out...

Demus said:

when I read something that's inaccurate, I think it's important to point it out...

Click to expand...

Fair enough, and I'm with you on this matter. We ought to speak properly and define our terms well. How else can we communicate? Still, there's more to this process than meets the eye, and it wouldn't surprise me if the truth of the matter lies somewhere in between your two positions. I don't know how much headway we can make into resolving the matter, given the limited resources (relatively speaking) most of us have here, but I'm not opposed to a discussion. Perhaps a more general debate of the topic warrants its own thread?

GuldTuborg said:

Perhaps a more general debate of the topic warrants its own thread?

Click to expand...

I don't wish to debate the flavor benefits of secondary as this topic has been done to death. At the end of the day, it's a matter of opinion and both sides of the argument are "right". Our discussion is relevant to the original poster so he can understand what causes some of the flavor changes in beer. The very title of this thread shows limited understanding of this; TRUB is a collection of debris unique to every batch so it cannot have a certain flavor. Yeast itself does have a flavor when you consume it, but does not leave behind that flavor when left in the bottom of a fermenter. In fact, leaving the beer on the yeast allows the yeast to absorb certain off flavor compounds OUT of the beer. This is the part of the discussion that is not opinion...

Demus said:

I. Yeast itself does have a flavor when you consume it, but does not leave behind that flavor when left in the bottom of a fermenter. In fact, leaving the beer on the yeast allows the yeast to absorb certain off flavor compounds OUT of the beer. This is the part of the discussion that is not opinion...

Click to expand...

Yes, see that IS where we differ in our opinion. Try it yourself.

Brew identical beers and pitch identical amounts of the same yeast strain and ferment at the same temperature. Bottle one at two weeks and bottle one at 5 weeks. Taste the differences. There will be some. Will it be displeasing to you? Maybe not, and maybe you'll even prefer the longer primary version. I just do not.

Yeast doesn't "absorb certain off flavor compounds OUT of the beer", either. Sure, it metabolizes diacetyl but it doesn't absorb it.

Yeast is a living microorganism and is far more complex than that.

I'm with Yooper. In reality, if you have good conttolnover your fermentation there is no reason to go 4 weeks primary as IMO it is primarily recommended for those that do not have good practice and temp control. The longer primary allows additional time for the yeast to clear unwanted things up to some degree.

My beers go no longer than 10-14 days and they're clear and tasty with no additional "yeasty" flavors imparted.

Do you really think commercial breweries sit on their beer for a month before packaging?

As for wheat style beers, if you are using a true wheat style yeast they'll be yeasty anyways as they are supposed to be and turned around quick and fresh.

I agree everyone's taste is different, I don't like yeast flavor in beers that are not supposed to taste like yeast

Demus said:

TRUB is a collection of debris unique to every batch so it cannot have a certain flavor.

Click to expand...

Unique, yes, but for any given recipe, I'm of the mind that it's damned similar. Brew the same recipe with the same ingredients and the content, and hence flavor contribution, of the trub, however it may or may not interact with the beer, will be fairly predictable.

Demus said:

Yeast itself does have a flavor when you consume it, but does not leave behind that flavor when left in the bottom of a fermenter.

Click to expand...

Perhaps not that same flavor, but it alters the flavor of the beer in other ways while it's there. Are those yeast flavors, too, or not? None of us have defined our terms that well, so we can't really say yet. Still, it's an open question.

Demus said:

In fact, leaving the beer on the yeast allows the yeast to absorb certain off flavor compounds OUT of the beer. This is the part of the discussion that is not opinion...

Click to expand...

As has been pointed out, these compounds are changed (metabolized), not absorbed. So you're correct...it isn't a matter of opinion, it's a belief, and it happens to be a false one. But, let's give you the benefit of the doubt, not nitpick semantics, and assume you just chose your wording incorrectly (see what I did there?). While it is true that yeast continue to metabolize compounds while flocced out at the bottom (how much, of course, it up to debate), this is such a small process that happens in the context of a much more complex one, that any attempt to pass it off as the whole story comes of as naive. There's just much more to it than that.

I've read the tasting panel results on long primary vs primary/secondary and they were not very conclusive. The bottom line here is that the process we know and love that creates beer is quite complex, and the resulting flavors quite subjective. Even if you could "prove" that in a split batch experiment the secondary batch tasted "better" or less "yeasty", that wouldn't prove that it would be better for EVERY batch; there's simply too many variables involved for that to be valid.
If you secondary and enjoy your beer, great. I gave it up a few years ago an not only found no ill effect, actually perceived an improvement in my beers. We won't "settle" a debate like this, I just wanted the original poster to realize there are brewers who leave their beer on the yeast cake for fairly extended periods without any overly yeasty flavors...

Demus said:

I've read the tasting panel results on long primary vs primary/secondary and they were not very conclusive. The bottom line here is that the process we know and love that creates beer is quite complex, and the resulting flavors quite subjective. Even if you could "prove" that in a split batch experiment the secondary batch tasted "better" or less "yeasty", that wouldn't prove that it would be better for EVERY batch; there's simply too many variables involved for that to be valid.
If you secondary and enjoy your beer, great. I gave it up a few years ago an not only found no ill effect, actually perceived an improvement in my beers. We won't "settle" a debate like this, I just wanted the original poster to realize there are brewers who leave their beer on the yeast cake for fairly extended periods without any overly yeasty flavors...

Click to expand...

And that's the key- if you love your beer with your process, that's what matters.

However, to "debate" it, if you haven't compared the beers side by side you can't just point to the error of others' technique.

I have tried it. I've compared side-by-side batches, and tasted. I do not like the character imparted by a long primary. Others do, so that's definitely important to note.

As another sidenote, I rarely use a "secondary".

I simply do not like the "yeasty" flavors that are imparted by long contact with the yeast cake/trub. But to say there is none is silly- there are definitely flavor impacts whether perceived as good or bad.

I thought I'd give a quick update after letting it bottle condition for almost four weeks and then giving it another week and a half in the fridge. Turns out, it's one of the best tasting beers I've made, absolutely fantastic. It's a perfect belgian blonde, IMO. I guess this whole thread was much ado about nothing.

Upthewazzu said:

I thought I'd give a quick update after letting it bottle condition for almost four weeks and then giving it another week and a half in the fridge. Turns out, it's one of the best tasting beers I've made, absolutely fantastic. It's a perfect belgian blonde, IMO. I guess this whole thread was much ado about nothing.

Click to expand...

That's just awesome to hear- thanks for keeping us posted!

We've all been worried about batches, mistakes, or eveil spirits. I'm glad it worked out.