The Secondary Topic Revisited

You all have managed to convince me that doing a secondary fermentation isn’t necessary for most beers. I’m curious - is the opinion the same for lagers?

Pretty much so.  I do. long primary, a d rest if needed, then keg for lagering.

I transfer my lagers to a secondary bucket after primary fermentation is complete, usually a couple weeks after pitching. I know some people use kegs to lager…but I don’t have enough kegs, or at least the discipline to keep a keg as a lagering keg for that long  ???

When I still bottled most of my beers I used a secondary to lager.  It works well for that.  Now that I keg I secondary in the keg.  I can usually keep enough beers on tap to keep me off of the lagering beers until they’re ready.

Not sure if this is correct but I consider a lagering period to be a secondary.  So I’d say no to your question.  You do want to secondary your lagers.  I typically let them ferment for a good three weeks or so, then a short d-rest and keg for lagering.  You want the beer on the yeast cake for the d-rest to be maximally effective, after that I see no reason to do a secondary prior to lagering since the beer will drop bright during lagering and if it doesn’t you can fine during this time.

With any aspect of brewing, I’ve found it useful to stop and think about the why of what you’re doing. Just because it’s “common sense” doesn’t mean it’s actually necessary. What do you want to get out of a secondary, and can you get the same results without it?

You, sir, receive today’s Gold Star for Pragmatism!  Good on ya!

I’m surprised you don’t have problems with acetobacter or oxidation by secondarying in a bucket. I certainly wouldn’t advise anyone to secondary on anything that it not air tight. And really you need to purge the container with co2 as well or at the very least the headspace.

If you transfer when theres still penty of CO2 in the liquid, I think it would kind of self-purge.  I don’t think a bucket is going to let in acetobacter, thats not been my experience.  But some oxidation would eventually be possible.

Thanks Denny! Also, that wasn’t a rhetorical question for the OP. I’m seriously wondering what specifically they want to get out of secondary-ing their lager.

My experience is once the co2 is gone acetobacter gets in wether it’s from a dry airlock or a bucket that has sat too long.  A bucket is a bad idea as a secondary from just about any standpoint unless you are starting up a second fermentation with fruit or something.

I understand.  That’s a valuable question to ask about any practice in home brewing.

I leave the lager in the primary for a month usually.  For a shorter time only if I need to free up a primary, but then I will lager it in the keg for a slightly longer period than is typical (a little more than one month).  I rarely do a d rest anymore.  When I rack to the keg, I do so with a keg that has been purged of O2 (I store my kegs under CO2 pressure with a little Star San in there, which I remove by depressing the out post on the keg.

Of course YMMV with a different SOP…

FWIW, that hasn’t been my experience. I try to lager in kegs, but when I need to I’ll use a bucket, and I’ve never had any problems with contamination or oxidation. I generally lager for a month or so.

Weird. The only times i have ever had an acetobacter infections is in buckets where I let the beer sit in the primary too long. or in carboys where I was secondarying and forgot about it and the airlock went dry. I personally think secondarying in buckets is a terrible idea and I would completely advise against it. Totally surprised to see anyone with any brewing experience to have contrary views.

+1.  I think you are just inviting problems with secondary…

I’m sure it’s at least partly environmental too. Acetobacter can’t get in the beer if it isn’t in the air to begin with. Even if it is in the air, I don’t see how the risk would be greater in a bucket than it is in any other unsealed vessel. Proper sanitary procedures can minimize the risk.

I think you’re on to something. I never had any weird infections when I lived in CO. The air was a lot drier there. In MO mold is everywhere, and I recently had a beer infected with what is probably mold.

I’m still not sure I agree 100% that it can’t get in there over time only due to my experience. Granted, I aged most of my beers in a pretty damp basement.  I don;t understand why the case would be that buckets would get it, or beers that lost airlock water, but not those in carboys or secondary carboys with sealed airlocks (besides the obvious fact that it lost co2 blanket). And in the case of buckets I’m talking about those that sat around for weeks after fermentation was over. But even if it can’t get in there “per se” I’m pretty sure none of us are following sterile brewing practices, even you, sean.  :wink:

co2 is the most important part of keeping a beer fresh, any contact with air lessens the amount of time that beer will retain it’s freshness, and acetobacter seems to be one of the easiest infection for people to get and it can’t grow in a co2 environment. But even if you brew in a sterile environment and have no worries with infection a bucket that sits around for a month after fermentation is finished will be much more likely to suffer the effects of oxidation that one in a sealed carboy or better yet stainless corny.

I just think it’s a bad idea all together. Can’t help myself from disapproving.  :wink:

By the way, you are underlining my point right there. First off your are dumping beer into a bucket that is full of air and undoubtably trace amounts of bacteria. Then you “seal” the bucket but it isn’t really sealed very well, it is o2 permeable (and don;t get me started on fruit flies and buckets because the lid doesn;t stop them). In a carboy at least the remaining co2 in solution fills the headspace and air can’t get in, assuming you have an air lock.

I do agree that environment can help minimize the risk. I live in the middle of a damp bug filled forest so my chances of infection are certainly higher than many others.