Secondary Fermentation Yes, no or maybe?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

SFC Rudy

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
295
Reaction score
281
Location
Junction City, KS
Transfer to secondary. Yes, no or maybe? I keep seeing arguments for and against transferring to secondary. I am not advocating for or against. Personally, I don’t, unless I’m fermenting a big beer I want to age some before I package.

This got me wondering why we are always told to transfer to secondary. Some observations from my experience.

I started homebrewing in 2001 while stationed in Germany. It was me, Charlie Papazian’s the Joy of Homebrewing and a recipe kit. My home brewery was an unheated storage room in my basement that stayed at a fairly steady 65F in the summer and 50F in the winter, coincidentally the “standard” ale and lager fermentation temps. I had a naturally temperature-controlled fermentation chamber. Same here in the states, my brew room stays below 70F. More on that.

Back then, and even today, every recipe you bought says to transfer to secondary. Why? Yeast Autolysis, if you don't know what it is look it up, I’m not going to regurgitate the internet.

Until recently we homebrewers did not really understand the importance of fermentation temperature control, especially at the higer end of the yeast tolerance. We were told to put our beer in a cool (60-75F) dark room and let the yeast do its thing. Then after a week transfer it to a secondary fermenter. Fermentation creates heat, and if your room was at 75F, who knows how hot your beer got. That heat stresses the yeast causing it to go through autolysis faster. The idea was/is to get the beer off the yeast cake before autolysis could occur. I never had an autolysis problem because my fermentation areas stayed temperature controlled.

I looked through the Joy of Home Brewing series and How to Brew 2nd edition and neither one referenced fermentation temperature control, just to put the fermenter in a cool, dark room. Not until 2017 did John Palmer in his 4th edition of How To Brew did he reference the importance of fermentation temperature control and not letting your beer get too warm.

So Should you transfer to secondary? IMO if you can control the fermentation temperature, no. If the area you are fermenting in stays at or above the recommended temperature for your yeast, then yes. Again, my opinion.
 
I hope I remember this correctly, (so please school me if I get it wrong!).. A 'Big Deal' 'back then' was made of osmotic-pressure fracturing cell-walls, but it took years of homebrewers talking it out and looking at the science to determine that this only happened due to a mass that could be measured in tons as happens in big monster corporation sized fermenters and at the homebrewing level it simply didn't happen hence: Skip the secondary.
.. I had completely forgotten the temperature side to that logic, so thank-you for bringing it up. :)
 
I only secondary high OG brews that I want off the yeast. Brewed my RIS yesterday that will ferment for 2 weeks. I’ll then put it in a secondary for a month with oak soaked bourbon. Only beer I use any secondary for. I’m sure additions of fruit and such would be fitting as well.
 
Wanna move the beer to a new vessel for the additional two or three days which it sits on top of the yeast after the yeast has finished with the fermentation?

Doesn't make much sense, if you ask me.
 
I've always wondered if autolysis has a little more to do with how thick that trub layer is. And for the average home brewer, even a 4 inch thick layer of trub isn't that much. But on the commercial scale, their trub layer can be many times that thick, and the weight of the cells on top might be putting a lot of pressure on the cells at the bottom.

Regardless, even with beer sitting on a 4 inch thick layer of trub for 6 weeks, I've not perceived any of the signs of it.

I don't use a secondary either.
 
I've always wondered if autolysis has a little more to do with how thick that trub layer is. And for the average home brewer, even a 4 inch thick layer of trub isn't that much. But on the commercial scale, their trub layer can be many times that thick, and the weight of the cells on top might be putting a lot of pressure on the cells at the bottom.

Regardless, even with beer sitting on a 4 inch thick layer of trub for 6 weeks, I've not perceived any of the signs of it.

I don't use a secondary either.
I think you’re spot on about the thickness of the trub layer. I have also read that the heat generated inside the trub layer can contribute to autolysis. My understanding is that the cone shape in large commercial conicals increases the depth of the trub layer (making it more three dimensional) and once it is compacted under the greater pressure that they experience, the trub can trap the heat from the yeast in the center of the trub cone which then becomes insulated from the cooler liquid on top, resulting in the dying yeast cells being exposed to higher temperatures. I think most commercial conical fermenters have a separate cooling jacket for the cone so they can cool the cone separately from managing the temperature of the main vessel.

Plus, Palmer did a great interview where he mentioned that yeast health and viability now is much better than it was in the 80’s when secondary was routinely suggested as a way of avoiding autolysis.
 
I age some high ABV beers in secondary for several weeks. Do your best to purge oxygen from the secondary and do a closed transfer if possible. I think the advice of not transferring to secondary applies mostly to beers that don't benefit from aging and to new brewers who may not have the experience to minimize oxidation.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top