I wanted to get some discussion going on the idea behind secondary usage and why you shouldn't use one the majority of the time and see what your thoughts are.
So, I hear a lot about how someone has just racked their beer to secondary, usually within a week or two of brewing. Why are you doing this? I ask because there are many issues to take into account every time that you do something with your beer.
The first reason to avoid racking to secondary is pretty straightforward: you are introducing oxygen with each transfer. As the beer ferments, it is producing CO2 which acts as a protective cover for the beer as it sits in the primary, particuarly with an airlock. In transferring the beer, you are driving out this CO2 and allowing it to mingle with the air to reach equilibrium, which increases oxygen exposure. This is the easiest reason to describe. If you are kegging your beer, there is really no need to do a true secondary as you are holding the beer in a separate vessel to allow for settling out. If you bottle, I'd suggest just transferring to the bottling bucket a day or two prior to bottling and adding finings to aid with reduction in particles in solution.
The bigger reason, overall, though is that often times brewers don't leave their beer in contact with the yeast long enough to finish it's work. Producing alcohol is only a small part of the equation. The yeast also produces esters, phenols and aldehydes, as well as other troublesome byproducts such as DMS or diacetyl. The yeast will clean up after itself if you give it a chance. Most beer in the homebrew scale should remain on the yeast 2-3 weeks. Once it is done, it will drop out. Fear of autolysis shouldn't really be an issue if you are using healthy yeast to begin with. It takes longer than 4 weeks in a stressful environment before you should ever have to worry about the yeast autolysing.
So, what are your thoughts?
But Craig, as your quote says, using secondary or not is not really a factor in how clear your beer is (all things being equal). I used a secondary for probably 12 years, because that was what I was taught, and what everyone did back then. At this point, I only do primary to save time. I don't recall any problems with oxidation or taking the beer off the yeast too soon. I've definitely not had any significant Autolysis since going primary only either. So I guess my opinion is it isn't a big deal either way, and I just prefer to save the time. Brewing beer takes long enough already :)
For me it depends on the beer and the mood I am in...
My stouts, browns, porters and scottish ales I will usually rack to a secondary. But, only after they have been in primary for a month to make sure the yeast has done its job.
My Ipa's, Creme Ales and lagers, I usually just rack those straight to my cornies and put them under about 10 psi of Co2 to make sure my cornies are not leaking. My lagers will sit for 4 to 6 weeks before I charge the corny with Co2 at 30 psi for carbonation. my ales about 2 weeks before I do the same.
I know this sounds assbackwards, lighter beers no secondary, dark beers in secondary, but my darks are usually higher in alcohol...
I definitely understand this argument and will never fault a brewer for what works for them. That's really what it all comes down to. My biggest concern is pulling the beer too soon, prior to it truly finishing up. I will say that different yeasts can benefit from racking due to levels of flocculation, etc.
Craig Koszewski said:
I did it on my very first batch but it was because I had no idea what I was doing. e.g., I saw "California *Lager*" for the ingredients which came with a complete beer brewing kit I got for Christmas and thought it was a true Lager (i.e., cold ferm temps; long cold storage). The directions suggested a secondary so I did it. Haven't done it since, though.
I stopped doing one also...+1