Why do we have to wait so long for homebrew ?

I've done a couple of Young's kits that have tasted a bit odd initially, the advice is generally that I need to wait a bit longer and it'll condition.

18 months ago I had a brewing session at Stewart Brewing's Craft Beer Kitchen....

https://www.stewartbrewing.co.uk/craft-beer-kitchen/

After the 'brewing' we had to wait > 2 weeks for the bottling. It was a bit longer for us to organise this (3 weeks?) but at this point the beer was _very_ drinkable.

So why does homebrew take longer to condition?

Different conditions?

What did you brew at this kitchen? Was it a kit?

I don't know for sure but if they (stewarts) force carbonate the bottles for you there's the 2 week priming period gone. They might also add finings for you that helps clear the beer.

I think it's partly to do with your condtioning out "off" flavours you get from not using fresh ingredients like you get with AG. I'm currently drinking a bitter that I bottled 5 days ago (I started drinking it after 3 days condition) The low OG (1.038)has something to do with why I'm able to drink it with such little conditioning but I also think the fact it doesn't use any roasted grains like choccy as well as the freshness of the ingrediants compared to a kit that may have been created weeks if not months before the HBer makes it up

Those youngs kits tend to be higher gravity like 1060s and have dry hopping so you will typically be minimum 2 weeks in the FV .. Like MQ says kits can be a little more hit and miss because they are not as fresh I found it was usually 6 weeks from pitching until they started to be drinkable.

I always try a bottle after two weeks and some are quite drinkable, Coopers English Bitter and Stout, and some aren't, Wherry, Simply Yorkshire Bitter. As already mentioned I think a lot depends on how fresh the kit is and how strong you brew it.

Confucius say, "Good things worth waiting for."

I've not had chance to bottle my latest brew so it will have spent 3 weeks in the FV before I rack it tomorrow ready for Saturday bottling.

I've heard people leaving it in the fv for a month to clear up or develop flavours.

I guess you can't just expect good beer straight away. Unless you drink the commercial **** with adatives

Bigcol49 said:

Confucius say, "Good things worth waiting for."

Click to expand...

Isnt that a Guinness ad? :)

Good things come to those that wait...
(unless its you're credit card bill)

Thanks for the feedback guys, comments....

> What did you brew at this kitchen? Was it a kit?

No but we used a big bucket of Malt Extract, hops at various stages, we did and pitched a yeast starter (from dried yeast)
and had some elderflower in near the end of the boil.

> I don't know for sure but if they (stewarts) force carbonate the bottles for you

The fermentation vessels were in a cold room under some pressure but we
had to slowly fill and cap the bottles from a tap.

I don't think it was completely flat at this point, but I don't remember it being 'fizzy' while filling the bottles.

> I think it's partly to do with your condtioning out "off" flavours you get
> from not using fresh ingredients like you get with AG

The Youngs kits have the malt extract in pretty well sealed 'metallic' bags. Is this going to go off?

Would the age of the yeast make a difference? Would it be worth getting fresh or liquid yeast and trying that?

This is one factor that Stewart's might have had better than an average kit.

> Those youngs kits tend to be higher gravity like 1060s and have dry
> hopping so you will typically be minimum 2 weeks in the FV ....
> .... I found it was usually 6 weeks from pitching until they started to be drinkable.

Unfortunately that seems to be the case. My problem is leaving it alone,
there's a big temptation to keep trying it to see if it's getting any better.

I think the solution might be to have _lots_ on the go at once!

Thanks again,

Nial

Nial said:

> I think it's partly to do with your condtioning out "off" flavours you get
> from not using fresh ingredients like you get with AG

The Youngs kits have the malt extract in pretty well sealed 'metallic' bags. Is this going to go off?


Unfortunately that seems to be the case. My problem is leaving it alone,
there's a big temptation to keep trying it to see if it's getting any better.

I think the solution might be to have _lots_ on the go at once!

Thanks again,

Nial

Click to expand...

It's not that it goes "off " it's just that I think from the time the wort's been made, the longer it's stored the longer its going to "oxidise" (I think what I mean by this is that, many things when exposed to oxygen start to "degrade" so that's what I think I really mean, "degrade"). So if your lucky and you get a kit that's fresh from the factory your going to get a better product but you cant really know which are the freshest kits apart from perhaps checking the sell by date/best before date.

Either have lots on the go or brew AG with a low OG. My latest batch of bitter(OG 1.038) I started tucking into after 3 days conditoning. A little green but still very nice and drinkable

I am a big fan of the hop powder sachet's you get with the St Peters beers. I reckon a lot of kits would benefit from these. Seems to add some freshness to them. You can really smell it when you add it as well. I might try adding 2 or even one after initial fermentation has slowed down.

I was under the impression that breweries operate under ideal fermenting and conditioning conditions so everything goes that much faster than we can achieve at home. They also ferment much greater volumes which also affects everything.
Having said that I have to say that properly conditioned AG homebrew is far superior to the majority of microbrewery or big brewery beer. It's only very occasionally I get a pint at my local real ale pub that's as good as my own.
I think this is partly down to them going for maximum efficiency. The greater the efficiency then the less malt you need for a given %ABV but the less body you end up with in your beer. Most commercial stuff tastes awfully `thin' to me.

Cwrw666 said:

I was under the impression that breweries operate under ideal fermenting and conditioning conditions so everything goes that much faster than we can achieve at home. They also ferment much greater volumes which also affects everything.
Having said that I have to say that properly conditioned AG homebrew is far superior to the majority of microbrewery or big brewery beer. It's only very occasionally I get a pint at my local real ale pub that's as good as my own.
I think this is partly down to them going for maximum efficiency. The greater the efficiency then the less malt you need for a given %ABV but the less body you end up with in your beer. Most commercial stuff tastes awfully `thin' to me.

Click to expand...

I totally agree here. Most breweries are doing things to maximise turnaround. There's no way they can afford to do some othe the things we do as HBers as we have the luxury of time.
I had a pint of Directors on draught the other days and I was surprised at how similar (malt flavour/profile wise but not the hops) to a bitter I had made tasted despite the fact I wasn't trying to make a Directors clone. But the big difference between my beer and the directors was that my beer has so much more body. The Directors tasted slightly watery

brumbrew said:

I've not had chance to bottle my latest brew so it will have spent 3 weeks in the FV before I rack it tomorrow ready for Saturday bottling.

I've heard people leaving it in the fv for a month to clear up or develop flavours.

I guess you can't just expect good beer straight away. Unless you drink the commercial **** with adatives

Click to expand...

All of my brews have had 2 to 3 weeks in primary. Bottled one yesterday that had 8 days then another 10 dry hopping. All the brews I've done have been crystal clear at bottling.

Thanks for confirming that for me. I went away last year to visit family and one ended up in the fv for just over 3 weeks. Tasted great at bottling :-) and even better a month later :-)

It will be bottled this weekend

Does the conditioning times vary very much depending on the priming product? Sugar-dextrose-dme?, once i bottled some beers with sugar that needed 2weeks or 20days at least to make my mouth feel the fizziness, but when i switched to dextrose priming i've seen that the same type of beer has carbonation times much more shorter idk xD

SkyStar said:

Does the conditioning times vary very much depending on the priming product? Sugar-dextrose-dme?, once i bottled some beers with sugar that needed 2weeks or 20days at least to make my mouth feel the fizziness, but when i switched to dextrose priming i've seen that the same type of beer has carbonation times much more shorter idk xD

Click to expand...

The great sugar priming debate! I'd say dextrose because the yeast can break it down or its chains chemically are shorter than table sugar. Making it more readily available to the hungry yeasties