no secondary

[NikoBrew]

So I was just listening to the brewstrong show on ..something.. I think ferm temp control. Anywho a couple people on there said using a secondary is uneccessary unless adding fruit or something. The last brew I did I needed one because I got more wort that I needed so I used a primary, racked to secondary and added the extra wort that I first boiled down a little more and chilled, also added honey (this was all per the recipe and process my friend used for the same brew, a RIS that turned out great).

In this instance obviously a secondary was needed as I added more wort, but under what other circumstances could I just use a primary? A lot of the times I've put sludge in my fermentor (from the bottom of the keggle after boil) as I couldn't get anyone to tell me a good reason why I shouldnt other than "you don't want it" and "I don't like it" which to me means crap (now learning a lot from those archives..lots of reasons to NOT do the things Ive done in the past it seems). So for that brew it seemed like a secondary would be needed.. I also seem to like adding honey to my boils. It's fun, I like the mouthfeel and lightness it gives (at least thats what Ive been told, it has those characteristics and I think its the honey that gives them, may be wrong on that too) and I'm thinking with honey in the brew maybe it should be transferred?

If using just a primary, how long is "too long" for it to sit? Of course it would very upon the brew but is there a general rule?

I have jamil and john's books on the way now and looking forward to reading them both and figure they'll cover this, but under what circumstance would a secondary NOT be needed and why?

Thanks fellow Army members (theres gotta be a cooler way to say that.. fellow bners? that sounds lame too)

[Mylo]

I have jamil and john's books on the way now and looking forward to reading them both and figure they'll cover this, but under what circumstance would a secondary NOT be needed and why?

Since it's easier, and I am lazy, I will tell you my opinion when a secondary fermenter is necessary. For all other reasons assume that it is NOT.

The one and only one purpose for a secondary is for putting the beer on an ingredient (be it bugs, wood, etc.) for a long time. If the yeast can complete the fermentation of all subsequent fermentable additions within a timeframe that is acceptable (depending on the initial health of the yeast) - then you don't need a secondary. I have dry hopped, added fruit, simple syrup, etc - all into my primary fermenter. Given healthy yeast, 3-4 weeks is well within the range of low risk of autoysis. If you want clear beer, then use a bright tank + cold temps + time, or just filter.


Mylo

[NikoBrew]

Given healthy yeast, 3-4 weeks is well within the range of low risk of autoysis. If you want clear beer, then use a bright tank + cold temps + time, or just filter.

Mylo

I'm good with that. I also want to be able to brew more beer without more equipment. I have a couple buckets which I don't use anymore but have two six gallon carboys. If I can just use one for each brew I can have two going at once.. I do have seven kegs Ive accumulated though.. need to brew more beer! Thanks man,

[Neuron_Theory]

Just to weigh in, I don't secondary anymore either for the usual reasons (lazy, oxygen, less shit to clean) but I do secondary my lagers. I figure it is good to get them off the yeast cake since the lagers I have done (Maibock and Helles) sat for 3 months in the cold. Not saying it is right or wrong, just sayin'. I would agree with Mylo though, probably need to secondary for bugs, wood chips, fruit, etc.

[NikoBrew]

Just to weigh in, I don't secondary anymore either for the usual reasons (lazy, oxygen, less shit to clean) but I do secondary my lagers. I figure it is good to get them off the yeast cake since the lagers I have done (Maibock and Helles) sat for 3 months in the cold. Not saying it is right or wrong, just sayin'. I would agree with Mylo though, probably need to secondary for bugs, wood chips, fruit, etc.

So who adds bugs to their beer? Must be a new thing Honestly I dont know what you mean by those but great info thanks man.

[Neuron_Theory]

bugs = brettanomyces and lactobacillus and things I'm probably forgetting. Add some funk to beer. There is at least one Sunday Session devoted to Brett. Look for the episode with Mike Mraz in early 2008.

[NikoBrew]

bugs = brettanomyces and lactobacillus and things I'm probably forgetting. Add some funk to beer. There is at least one Sunday Session devoted to Brett. Look for the episode with Mike Mraz in early 2008.

Will do. I've been going through the brew strong archives over the last few days and loving it. The session is great though for hours of entertainment and brewing info. I really like that we've got shows though that are just one hour devoted to a specific technical component of brewing. It's friggin great. I just read somewhere that the really big beers should get a secondary though since..well.. they're big. My last brew was a big one and I'm planning on continuing to make mostly high gravity brews. Possibly even a little smaller than five gallon so all my grain fits in my 48qt cooler mash tun so I actually get some decent efficiency (last brew was like 24 pounds and that really wasn't enough room, still tastes fantastic though). Thanks for the info.

[jomebrew]

I brew with a friend (when I say brew, I mean carry the heavy stuff, sanitize carboys, PBW kegs) and used to always transfer to a secondary. Like you, we listened to brewstrong and JZ keeps saying you don't need to secondary. So we stopped. My buddy makes freekin' great beer. Everyone is great. Never a bad one in any style. The beer is just as good without a secondary and I have one less thing to clean (as an assistant brewer). So, skipping the secondary is goodness all around.