- This topic has 15 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ryan posted a link to a book about aging beers (Vintage Beer: https://www.amazon.com/Vintage-Beer-Tasters-Guide-Improve-ebook/dp/B00ESCVNU2). I’ve picked up a copy to read and learn more.
I know there is a LOT of experience in this group about aging beers, wines, and spirits (ports, …), so I would like get opinions and experiences.
I’m under the impression that bulk aging of beer, wine, and spirits is common in industry, and I know it is common to bottle condition and age in smaller volumes. I’ve aged mead for years in bottles, and I’ve now aged a mead in a 5g keg for a year and I plan to bottle that mead. I want to try aging a beer in a keg.
I know that bottle conditioning allows yeast in the bottle to naturally carbonate a beer, and I know that yeast continue to make other changes while in the bottle. I don’t filter my beers or use finings, so I’m aware there is quite a bit of yeast in my beer in kegs available to continue to condition the beer.
So to my question:
1) other than using additional sugars to allow yeast to carbonate in a bottle, or even naturally condition in a keg, what is the difference in putting enough CO2 pressure in a keg to seal the lid and leaving it to condition compared to bottle conditioning?Also, please feel free to post/discuss other experiences and opinions about aging.
Sam
Serving:
Genmaicha Brown Ale
Munich Dunkel
IPAConditioning:
Fermenting:
House AmberPlanning:
?Sam, this is always an interesting subject for one very important reason; learning/knowing when to identify exactly WHEN an aging beverage has reached it’s peak. As we all know, every bier will reach it’s own peak of conditioning, and then it will begin to go down hill from there. Typically, I think as brewers we are, by default, also our own “cellarman” and so there could be a hobby within a hobby here!
To your question about natural conditioning (upon yeast) and force-carbonating, there is a school of thought (to which I subscribe) that says you are not actually cellaring a bier at all if you simply force-carbonate the keg. Only living, active yeast will make meaningful improvements to the bier through time (combined with proper cellar temperatures). I know there will be those who read this and say, “nonsense, I’ve had many commercial brews that have “aged” in my cellar and taste much better as a result”. I’m not saying there won’t be changes to a filtered and force-carbonated beer that sits around, and if someone likes those changes, good for them, but by definition, it is not truly “cellering”, but I suppose you could call it “aging”. I say the primary change for those biers is simply oxidation, perhaps along with some precipitation of tannins and polyphenols. The same applies to ‘lagering’ bier. Leaving a bottle of Spaten Oktoberfest in your fridge will not continue to “lager” it. It’s already been filtered of all living yeast, so that that point, you’re simply cold-storing it until it gets consumed, there will be no improvements to the bier through time and if anything, it will quickly go downhill from there. All of this being said, naturally-conditioned biers are not immune to off-flavors and may also fall prey to autolysis ,if left on the yeast for too long. …which brings us back to identifying that “peak” of conditioning, which is a very difficult thing to do. I’m thinking the only way to identify that is to do regular tastings, while taking scrupulous notes! Just my perspective.
I am in agreement with Jim on the fact that bulk aging on yeast is going to give you a much different result that aging in a keg or in bottles. My recipe for a Biere De Garde is bulk aged on the yeast for up to 6 months.
Cheers
Serving: Brooks Irish Red 4.8% ABV
Serving: Robert's IPA
Fermenting: We Are The Dreamer of Dreams (NEIPA)OK. I haven’t done any long term aging on yeast. My interpretation of ‘aging on yeast’ is to leave the product in the fermenter for an extended length of time. I’m still cautious about leaving a beer in the ‘primary’ fermenter for more than a month because of reports of potential off flavors. I may have to get over that fear. 🙂
I do agree that filtering the yeast and force carbonating will produce a different result than allowing the yeast to carbonate and continue to make other changes to the beer.
If a beer is NOT filtered and moved to a 2nd container to age, will the yeast continue to make the other changes if additional sugars are not added for carbonation?
Also, if yeast was not filtered and sugars are added to naturally carbonate, what would be the expected difference if the beer is in a bottle versus in a larger container? (Both the bottle and larger container would be held at the same environmental conditions.) It seems to me if the primary variable is the size of the container for carbonation and aging, that bulk aging might produce a more consistent product compared to multiple smaller containers.
Sam
Serving:
Genmaicha Brown Ale
Munich Dunkel
IPAConditioning:
Fermenting:
House AmberPlanning:
?Bulk aging on yeast scares me a little bit (autolysis). While the old books recommending to take off the yeast within 2 weeks have been proven wrong (that’s more of advice for commercial breweries due to the pressure on the yeast in those big tanks), keeping it on yeast for several months is something I’ve seen people have issues with before. To be clear, I’m talking about a primary type cake type of situation, not pre final filtered beer. For example, a lager brewery might filter pretty damn fine after 10-14 days of 40s-50s temps, and then cold lager near freezing temperature for another 5-8 weeks on a lighter lager, throughout that time there is still yeast in the beer conditioning it. Then they’ll do a final filter to remove all the yeast before kegging it. That’s standard/good for the beer (and obviously if they krausen like Jim does, that’s fantastic for the appropriate styles too). But if you make like a saison or even a belgian quad, and you pitch your yeast on March 1st, you shouldn’t keep it on that same yeast for 5 months (you risk serious off flavors developing), but you should repitch fresh yeast at bottling time.
As far as bottling goes, what Jim says about bottle conditioned versus force carbonated beers is exactly my understanding (and the Vintage Book says similar things, goes into even greater detail). Another factor is what type of carbonation you’d like to achieve. In order to get proper carbonation on a lot of belgian beers in particular (like a farmhouse saison or golden strong), you need to bottle condition them.
I personally like to bottle condition english barleywines because I think the yeast in the bottle helps them develop more over time.
When in doubt, you can look to see what your favorite commercial examples are doing and that’s a good default to be at. Most big stouts are not bottle conditioned, they’re force carbonated. It makes sense, they aren’t yeast driven and you usually want a fairly clean yeast that works hard and then steps back and lets the roasted, chocolate, vanilla, oak type flavors shine and a lot of development in those beers is through oxidation and mellowing of some of the initial stronger alcohol flavors.
American barleywines seem to go both ways, English more often seem to be bottle conditioned.
Hey Sam, I don’t think I notice any difference at all in the flavor of the product regardless of whether it is conditioned in bulk (i.e. a 5G keg) or in bottles. For example, I often put half of a 10G batch into a corny keg (prime and seal the keg), and then prime and bottle the remaining 5G into 22oz or 16oz bottles. Both portions are kept at the same cellaring temp (usually at least 68F if it’s a “standard” ale). After 12 to 14 days both are conditioned to roughly the same volume of carbonation and both taste the same to me. This applies to pretty much every ale I’ve made like this. I’ve compared a variety of ales side by side with others and we could never really find any significant difference in flavor or character.
From what I’ve learned, I do think your instinct is correct in that (generally speaking) you should not keep bier in the primary fermenter, atop the original yeast for an extended period of time. However moving it to another fresh container (corny keg or bottle) and priming it is a normal part of the process for crafting “real ale”. And in my view, yes there would be a difference between finished products if you chose to keg one half of your batch without priming it versus if you primed the other half. Adding the priming sugar is an important step since it jump-starts your secondary fermentation in the bottle (or keg) which is the whole point of bottle or “cask” conditioning. this rejuvenated yeast growth is what cleans up all sorts of unwanted byproducts that the original fermentation failed to clean up. That’s not to say there wouldn’t (perhaps) be some level of improvement by simply leaving the beer “flat” and unfiltered in the cask, but you would be missing a vital part of the process and certainly would not get the most bang for your buck. The original yeast is all tuckered out, and simply wants to drop out and go to sleep. Versus the new secondary fermentation which is full of vigor and anxious to get to work eating priming sugar (and any diacetyl, or other remaining byproducts along with it!). Plus…an un-primed product would be flat and would require force-carbonating in the end, which sort of defeats the purpose of “cellaring” the bier. Brewers of traditional bottle-conditioned brews (think Chimay, Westmalle, Dupont, etc.) feel that this secondary conditioning in the bottle is so important to the final product, that they actually pitch FRESH YEAST along with priming sugar. In fact for my really big ales (Tripels, Quads, Scotch Ale, Old Ale, etc.) I make a fresh starter to use on bottling day. Particularly with those stonger brews, the original yeast has already been through a war and is now kaput!
And since we were discussing the length of time one might leave a bier atop the yeast, in the primary fermenter, I thought I’d share this pic. It’s not uncommon for me to break the standard rules when it comes to any number of Belgian-style ales, including ales made with authentic yeasts for Farmhouse ales, trappist-styles or other brews with low-flocculating yeast characteristics. The attached was taken today, on day 24 of primary fermentation for my Golden Hen Saison. I use the Farmhouse 3724 yeast (reputedly from Brasserie De Blaugies). It behaves the same way every time; stays cloudy and poorly flocculated for WEEKS on end, but it is highly attenuated. I “dumped” yeast from the conical today, but only purged about a pint since it was STILL mostly just cloudy ale. seems pointless to waste bier! Gravity is at 1.006 and I expect it to drop to about 1.003, but it will take about 10 days to 2 weeks to do so. I’ll also need to kill any heat in my cellar to get this to drop clear enough for bottling….otherwise I won’t be able to re-yeast it at bottling time because any old yeast that hangs around in suspension will absolutely wreck my bottle-conditioning, and as we all know, without that high carbonation, it just won’t taste right. Despite the cloudiness…this sample actually tastes pretty good, with no off flavors.
I just started reading the Vintage Beer book last night, and I’m enjoying it.
OK, good to hear that given similar conditions, bulk aging isn’t significantly different than bottle aging. And there is still general consensus that moving beer off the ‘primary’ yeast cake is still a good idea if the beer is to be aged/conditioned in a larger container before carbonating.
You both have given me a lot to think about when it comes to carbonating my barley wine. It is more like an English Barley Wine (lower bittering, Imperial Pub yeast, and I used Loral hops which have a floral characteristic). The keg is currently at basement temperature of ~64F, and I only put ~5psi on the keg to seal the lid.
I’m considering leaving it in the keg for a couple months, then I might add priming sugar to the keg to carbonate it. I’m really not interested in going back into bottling yet, but this might push me over the edge for longer term aging/conditioning/cellaring. I don’t see how with my current setup I could realistically long term age in a keg in my 3 keg keezer. It would be too cold to allow the beer to change much, and I would be limiting my available drinking supply.
In the future, I might pickup a 2.5gal keg so I can keg some of a batch and bottle some.
Sam
Serving:
Genmaicha Brown Ale
Munich Dunkel
IPAConditioning:
Fermenting:
House AmberPlanning:
?I love my 2.5-3 gallon kegs for so many reasons.
Keep us posted on how the book ends up for you. I reference it all the time. The beer examples they go into depth about towards the end of the book are really spot on in my experience. I have experience aging/drinking about half the examples he uses. Rochefort and Bigfoot are two of my favorites in there, and the comments about Brooklyn’s Chocolate Stout are just dead on for when it falls off and how it changes up until then.
Jim:
How do you feel about fermenting, aging and carbonating in a unitank? You can dump the yeast after the primary time ( I usually do that at 10 days). Then prime it right in the tank. I am using my chiller to control the temp in the unitank. I was thinking of trying this using your Krausening approach. The advantage I see is being able to let some of the priming yeast settle out.
Chuck
Hey Sam…..Ben Fitzsimmons was selling some 2.5G casks a while back. I bought two of them from him, but I think he had maybe 4 to sell. The price was right, so might be worth checking in to see if he still has them.
Chuck, I see no reason why it couldn’t work (at least in theory) to ferment to completion in a unitank. The key is getting the bier off the yeast and allowing it to develop conditioning. I know some of the newer conicals are able to hold higher volumes of Co2 than my old first-generation Blichmann units, so (again, in theory), you could almost turn the fermenter into a brite tank and serve directly from the conical by the time the bier is finished! Note, this is my thinking for ale production, not sure if that would work too well for a lager. Maybe it would, but lager yeasts are infamous for “hanging around” and often require moving to a new container to truly clear, and lagers should really be QUITE clear to be at their best. Just my 2 cents, so still worth giving a try, even if for a lager….that’s part of the fun!
Just an anecdotal data point. I made a Belgium Dubbel for our Belgium style last year. I do not even know where the original recipe came from. I bottle primed the beer. It was not good and it came in at second to the bottom of the taste testing for dubbels. It seemed to have an astringent flavor to it. I packed the bottles away in my brew room which stays about 64-66 degrees, in the basement. I was cleaning stuff out the other day to start brewing and went to lift a case of what I thought was empty bottles and discovered my two cases of Dubbel bombers. I decided to chill one down and taste it. It was a lot better than I remembered (maybe I was desperate for a beer). These bottles have been setting there for a year.
I will try a couple of more and see how they taste – if they appear okay I will bring one to our next meeting whenever that happens.
….perhaps another argument for conditioning bier naturally, on the yeast? Its a strange thing since in my experience there seems to be a “sweet spot” for aging bier. Knowing when it has reached it’s peak is a moving target, but it sounds like your Dubbel is somewhere near the peak Chuck.
Obviously it depends on the style of Beer. IPAs and beers that depend on hops for their character and flavor need to be drank “fresh” as the hop oils will break down over time.
I think in my case, the beer had some fusal alcohol which the yeast did not yet go through when we tasted it last year (the beer was too young). The bottle aging in that case allowed the yeast to slowly work on those compounds causing the off flavor.
I was reading up on this and one article said that chocalate malts can cause this (which waa used in my dubbel) and that aging fixes the problem.
True comment Chuck regarding the “drinking the bier fresh”. My only point was that improvement might be found in ALL styles of bier (lagers, ales, strong or otherwise) if aged on the yeast as opposed to simply force-carbonating. After all, there are commercial examples of all styles still carbonated/conditioned in this way. But I guess I’m venturing down a slightly different path with that notion, albeit a parallel and closely related path.
- The forum ‘General Chat’ is closed to new topics and replies.