So THAT's what diacetyl tastes like!

Never tasted D in a homebrew...never...but have experienced it infrequently and always in a commercial brew...some from very reputable breweries.

Aldehydes (green apple) seem much more common in homebrew for some reason.

1-2-3 would be a good rule of thumb if it were 3 (weeks in primary), 2 weeks at room temp, and 1 month in keg for most beers...IMHO

 

My recollection is I picked it up in the India Ale, as I've had that most recently. It didn't disagree with me, though. I just picked up Samuel Smith's Chocolate Stout, encouraged by another thread. I'll see if I can pick it up in there, but I suspect the chocolate character will obscure it.

 

I'd go with [if no dry hopping] 3 (weeks in primary), 2 weeks at 31*F, and 1 month in keg for most beers. Or maybe switch the last two.

 

No dry hopping! : )

 

Unless you are making a high ABV beer or adding fruit, no reason to go over two months before serving.

 

True for a hefeweissen or LOW abv beer..but most beers will benefit with a litttle patience...maybe even the hefe and low ABV beer, IMHO.

Edit: as for the high ABV beer...usually minimum of 6 months for me...drinkable at 2...but so much better at 6.

High ABV Edit: The big variable it seems is packaging...if you have ways to slow down O migration (kegging and purging), all the timetables change. Cheers

 

It really depends what benefit you get from the extended aging. Some malty beers benefit from extended aging where the malt flavors will meld better. Certain yeast strains like Dupont need extended aging. However, if you are experiencing rough yeast character there is a problem in your fermentation process and you are using time as a proxy for fixing a problem. There's no reason why a hefeweizen or even a 7% IPA needs two months before it's reached the proper time.

The appropriate time for a beer to be ready to drink is always dependent on the particular beer but that sort of bumper sticker rule that beers need to sit in primary for a month and similar nonsense is bandied about the internet a lot but it's just wrong. If it were even remotely true cask ale would be undrinkable and you wouldn't see good craft brewers rolling out beer 2-3 weeks after fermentation.

 

One aspect that was somewhat discussed in this thread is: when is homebrew ‘done’?

I think that most folks would agree that at a minimum the fermentation is complete when the yeast has consumed all of the sugars that it can metabolize; i.e., the final gravity is reached. A number of BAs keep the beer in the primary for a period of time after the final gravity is reached (or you could transfer to a secondary vessel). The timeframe beyond when the final gravity is reached is a conditioning phase. John Palmer is an advocate of bulk conditioning (i.e., conditioning either in the primary or a secondary). There is no doubt that further conditioning can benefit the beer; during this timeframe the yeast will metabolize compounds such as acetaldehyde, fusel alcohols and other unwanted compounds (presuming they are present in the immature beer).

In another thread I made an argument that conditioning can occur in the bottle equal to bulk conditioning. I have no scientific papers to back up this claim but it has been my personal homebrewing experience that this is true. When I first started homebrewing back in 1995 the instructions from my LHBS was to bottle when the fermentation is complete:

“It will take four to seven days for fermentation to be complete, although it may take a bit longer. You may bottle when the water level in the airlock is even or when the hydrometer reading is the same two days in a row.”

I am sure that the majority of BAs would recommend that the airlock not be used to evaluate the completion of fermentation but instead use multiple hydrometer readings over a few days to confirm that the final gravity is achieved.

So, for many years I would bottle when primary fermentation is complete. I would notice that most beer styles would improve with additional time in the bottle. For example, a given batch may reach peak flavor at 4-5 weeks within the bottle.

Over the past number of years I have become more relaxed in my homebrewing schedule and I will let the beer sit in the primary a period of time beyond when fermentation is complete. Sometimes 7 days beyond completion of fermentation. I still notice that my beers benefit from aging in the bottle beyond the two week carbonation timeframe.

I should mention that I have never conducted a secondary for my ales.

I suppose this is a long winded way I stating I was never a proponent of the 1-2-3 rule. I am of the opinion that quality homebrewed beer could be made via a 1- 5 rule:

· 1 week of fermentation assuming that final gravity is achieved
· 5 weeks of time in the bottle.

Cheers!

 

Nothing here to argue with...I will use "time as a proxy" and "bumper stickers' to encourage new brewers to make better beer than if they rushed it.

ps... 3 weeks does not equal 1 month in primary...and 2 months does not equal extended aging

 

Jack,
I consulted Jamil Zainasheff on this topic several batches ago (my first lager, Herr Professor, an Oktoberfest brewed in 2009 to celebrate my renewed teaching contract) and he seemed to agree that I could accomplish the same thing by lagering in bottles (after priming) vs. bulk conditioning (followed by priming). The question arose because I wondered if I would need to add yeast after bulk conditioning in order to bottle prime. JZ's advise was to bottle prime first, then lager. He suggested that bulk conditioning was bunk, and that conditioning ought to be able to happen properly regardless of volume. I'm paraphrasing, but I feel like I've captured the essence. You are not alone in your opinion on this topic.
PW

 

They are awesome. But I think our collective tastes (as a species) have probably evolved right along with what yeast do naturally. So when healthy yeast pitches are allowed to do their thing, we like the result. If there would have been an evolutionary advantage for beer yeasts to produce and not clean up (say) asphalt, we'd probably be striving for it in our homebrews today.

 

Three cheers for coevolution! Hip! Hip! Hooray!

 

Damn. There goes that. Thanks.

 

Heresy!

 

I'm not sure if this will ad any clarity, but some of you might remember about three months or so ago I posted a video of one of my carboys basically being a volcano with a steady stream of foam coming out of the top. It was a clone of Chad Yakobson's Baltic Brett Porter. I'm still not too sure why it had the foam snake. It was fermented low, I think it was the dark roasted malts.

But since it was determined to be done, it's been crashed to freezing, warmed, forgotten about, chilled, warmed, chilled ,etc. I don't own a kegerator so it's been at my beckon call of when I wanted to drink it.

Now it was never a bad beer. After all, this random couple liked it:



I think that's a key. There are things that you can not over come. But every beer and every style will have certain challenges. But it's really this beer is tasting it's best now. And it was off the yeast cake long ago.

Yeah, I had a good point when I started. Time to hit a corny.

 

Looking at that gentleman's sweater I would say his taste is highly suspect.

Anyway, a few comments on other comments, and unfortunately they have nothing to do with diacetyl:
I use WY1968 all the time and never have attenuation problems. Then again I mash at 148F and have been known to use sugar from time to time.

Just because you make a starter does not mean it is the right amount of yeast. For a long time I was making the occasional shake starter and really thought I was doing everything right. Then I tried my beer side by side in a big homebrew exchange and realized I had just gotten my ass kicked and the reason was fermentation. So I worked on that aspect and got a stirplate and I have had much better beer since then.

I agree that some beers get better with time, but that does not mean they should taste bad early. A few exceptions but even bigger beers can taste just fine in a week or two after brewday. Provided you keg and such.

So to bring this back around to the topic at hand if you have a fermetation off flavor then you have a fermentation problem. Sounds pretty obvious when you say it out loud. Time will fix some of those problems, but it is better to look at the source of the problem a little closer and address it there.

Amen. /end sermon.

 

Is that deKulminator?