Yeast cleaning up. Is this really a thing?

[Malter White]

The Coopers DIY instructions say once your SG has stabilised over two days, fermentation is complete and you're ready to bottle. However, many folks on here suggest to leave the wort a few more days for the yeast to clean up. I have done this on most occasions and to be honest I can't tell the difference between a beer that has been bottled on day 7 or one that has been bottled a few days later.
It got me thinking:
If SG has flatlined and fermentation has ceased then are the yeast actually doing anything?
Once sugar is added to bottles the fermentation starts up again and then the beer sits for usually at least two weeks, so wouldn't "clean up" occur after this secondary fermenting stage, if it actually does occur?
Are the yeast that clever they know when they are in a FV or in a bottle?
Why doesn't the manufacturer suggest a "clean up" stage? You could safely say they've been brewing longer than any of us and surely know what they're doing.
I'm not here to poo-hoo anyone's brewing processes. I'm just inquisitive.
We all have our own way of doing things and if it suits you, DO IT! Cheers.

[MitchellScott]

I find that the brew clears up over a few days after FG has been reached. But I also CC to clear things up so the difference is probably negligible. With kegging trying to keep as much sediment/yeast out as possible makes sense to a clearer beer but even with bottling the less sediment you have in the bottle the better. There will still be plenty of yeast cells to perform the secondary fermentation.

Many people could also recommend it as a Diacetyl cleanup but I am no expert on that. I'm sure someone else has a better idea.

Either way I generally dry hop at fermentation temps after FG has been reached anyway so I use that time to allow the yeast to "clean up" then remove hops and CC.

[Otto Von Blotto]

Basically they consume byproducts of fermentation once the sugars are done with. 

It's just in the FV there are more yeast, so it happens faster than in bottles. Beer also conditions faster in one large volume compared to many small volumes, which is why kegs reach their peak quicker than bottles do. 

[Malter White]

Just for the record, I've got a brew ready for bottling today but I'm going to wait until Saturday so the yeast can clean it up a bit first.

[Marty_G]

1 hour ago, MUZZY said:

Why doesn't the manufacturer suggest a "clean up" stage?

Probably for the same reason they don't recommend temp control and D rests. The instructions are for novice brewers so they keep it simple. 

I too keep it in the FV  for longer and found that 14 days is around the magic number. My son in-law turns them over in 7ish days and while his beer is good the consistency is not there.  He kegs and goes from FV to glass in about 9 days. 

Edited November 27, 2019 by MartyG1525230263

[Malter White]

I appreciate everyone's feedback and value much of the stuff many of you have taught me over the last couple of years. As always, your comments make a lot of sense.
Thank you.

[Lab Cat]

Coopers suggest or leave out a lot of things that can help make brewing better and more consistent. I doubt you can make decent beer by following the brew 'recipes' on their tins. Someone's expectations must be very low to be happy with brewing that way.

If they tried to write a instruction sheet on how to do it well, they'd turn a lot of people away from their products. But this is something they could improve. Their videos are the best way to do it, but even those prefer simplicity first.

[Marty_G]

3 minutes ago, Lab Rat said:

Their videos are the best way to do it, but even those prefer simplicity first.

100% they could have a series of clips to match the recipes. Novice which would just be basic non temp controlled kit and kilo. Then have others that show and explain why it improves with temp control, D rests, specialty malts,  grain and hop additions. So the whole gambit from novice to expert.  

[BlackSands]

I suspect "clean up" actually occurs during those days where you're testing for and confirming FG.  By the time you've confirmed FG over a 2 or three day period, "clean up" has already happened.  Based on diacetyl test I did some years ago it seems it happens very quickly.   IMO there's no need to add extra days once FG is confirmed.   

"The length of time we had to leave the beer in contact with the yeast to mop up the last traces of diacetyl and pentanedione was not very long, we're talking a day or two… " - Dr Charles Bamforth, Professor of Brewing Science

[Otto Von Blotto]

That's why I usually only leave it an extra day after the second FG test, sometimes no days depending on when the test is done. 

If the second test two days after the first is the same then obviously it finished fermenting at least by the time the first sample was taken, possibly earlier, so those two days in between it would already be cleaning up. The extra day is only to ensure it. For my ales, the FG tests are usually done 6 and 8 days after pitching, so the cold crash begins after 9 days. No use leaving it any longer because it doesn't need it.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Otto Von Blotto

[Lab Cat]

31 minutes ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

100% they could have a series of clips to match the recipes. Novice which would just be basic non temp controlled kit and kilo. Then have others that show and explain why it improves with temp control, D rests, specialty malts,  grain and hop additions. So the whole gambit from novice to expert.  

They should do that. The current videos don't go far enough - they're still aiming to sell the premise that brewing is is simple. It is, but to make really good beer you have to have a bit of know how and put a bit more effort it. They label thier recipes according to level of 'expertise', they could do the same with videos.

Get King Ruddager to do them, then he can partner with Coopers to sell his 2 thumbs merch.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Lab Rat

[Marty_G]

12 minutes ago, Lab Rat said:

they're still aiming to sell the premise that brewing is is simple

And as you say "it is" doing anything with a kit can is pretty simple be it K&K through to hop tea, late hopping and grain steeps. It is all pretty easy. 

[Otto Von Blotto]

AG is easy too, it's the knowledge behind it that is, or can be, a bit more complicated. 

The processes themselves aren't difficult to do, and you can brew great beer using them without necessarily knowing why you're using them. As long as you know what to do and how and when to do it, you'll make decent beer. The why is more in depth and obviously not everyone is interested in it. I am personally, because I like knowing why I'm doing something, and whether or not there might be a better or easier way to achieve a better outcome. I'm not interested in changing processes if there will be no benefit or risk of a lesser outcome, however. 

[BlackSands]

1 hour ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

AG is easy too ...

While I agree, I think when most refer to K&K etc as being easy they are probably also thinking about the time commitment i.e.  30 - 60 mins is perceived as 'easy' where 5 - 5.5 hours is considered 'hard'.

[Marty_G]

11 minutes ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

I'm not interested in changing processes if there will be no benefit or risk of a lesser outcome, however. 

I am a bit like that with AG. I know the outcome will not be lesser but is the time needed off set enough by the reduced cost and the improved quality. Right now I am more than happy with the brews I have done and the time taken to do them. I can have a brew ready to pitch in 30 minutes which costs less than $30.  Where as the time needed for a BIAB or a full mash is in the hours.  However, in saying that I am yet to taste an AG home brew and I may be talking through my hat because there may be a quantum leap in quality that makes those arguments redundant. 

[Otto Von Blotto]

I noticed a difference between extract based brews and AG when I first started with it. The flavours in AG beers tended to pop out more, and the beer tasted fresher rather than the flavours being a bit subdued and it having a bit of a "manufactured" flavour. Sort of like making bolognaise sauce from scratch rather than just buying a tin of it, although not to quite the same extent. 

But like anything it's dependent on the individual to decide how much time they want to invest in a hobby. It does take me about 6 hours to brew a batch of wort but a lot of it is sitting around waiting for something to finish, during which time I do other things around the house. 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Otto Von Blotto

[BlackSands]

2 hours ago, MartyG1525230263 said:

However, in saying that I am yet to taste an AG home brew and I may be talking through my hat because there may be a quantum leap in quality that makes those arguments redundant. 

Generally, I find that AG only really tastes better when I drink it alongside and extract brew... which is literally what I have just done.  Took a 'sneak peak' of my AG Irish Red and then followed by an extract bitter brewed a wile back.  They're similar stylistically and looking at the two recipes I see they are actually quite similar.   BUT, the AG beer really is as Ottos says -  fresher.  I can taste the grain.  However, the extract brew, when tasted in isolation tastes perfectly fine to me.   So, I'd say if you're time poor then extract - "kits and bits" brews etc certainly satisfy.   If you do have a little more time to spare though then partials are the perfect 'best of both worlds' solution IMO.  And, you can also adopt some "short and shoddy" practices to reduce the time commitment further too if desired.  

Edited November 28, 2019 by BlackSands

[PaddyBrew2]

Without kicking off an AG vs extract debate, for me the difference is night and day. I liked extract brewing. It’s relatively quick and the hard prep work already comes in a tin or pack of dry malt. The beer was decent. Always had that twang though which comes from the freshness or lack thereof of said ingredients. Since I moved to AG in June, It’s moved to the next level. You have total control over the process and the end result is head and shoulders above it’s extract counterpart. Assuming it’s a good balanced recipe of course. Will still do my toucan stout for the winter 

[Greenyinthewestofsydney]

1 hour ago, PaddyBrew2 said:

Without kicking off an AG vs extract debate, for me the difference is night and day. I liked extract brewing. It’s relatively quick and the hard prep work already comes in a tin or pack of dry malt. The beer was decent. Always had that twang though which comes from the freshness or lack thereof of said ingredients. Since I moved to AG in June, It’s moved to the next level. You have total control over the process and the end result is head and shoulders above it’s extract counterpart. Assuming it’s a good balanced recipe of course. Will still do my toucan stout for the winter 

Same as me paddy. 90% of my batches are all grain. The other 10% are usually partial mashes of 2kg grain and a pale ale tin. The partials are good beers but i can still taste the difference 

[Shamus O'Sean]

I still like doing both AG and KnK batches.  Since June the split is 50:50.  I also want to try one of the FWKs, but there are so many AG and kit recipes to try first.

[James Lao]

Having done AG and now back to kits/ stove top boils, I can say that AG is 100% better - usually.

I did have mainly amazing beers from AG brewing , but did have a few average ones, mainly from not getting my processes right.

I agree with the comment that an extract brew is good in isolation.

Think it is easier to get a consistently decent brew with extract brewing ( with less effort and time)

But you just can’t beat that freshness and control over ingredients - slight changes in malt that will change the taste at the glass, that you just can’t get with extract.

But for the time poor you still can get great beers from doing a well made extract brew.

Think there are a few examples around the world of extract brews winning at beer comps etc.

Still haven’t ruled out making a return to AG one day!!

As far as yeast cleaning up I agree wit the above - it is doing that as soon as FG  reached.

Brew on dudes, whatever ya flavour!!

Cheers

James

[MitchBastard]

Be good if the yeast would clean up the entire FV while it’s at it. 

[Marty_G]

12 hours ago, James Lao said:

I can say that AG is 100% better - usually.

Do you mean AG:  "is 100% better"  or 100%, it is better ... 

[James Lao]

Should stop posting after 6 homies!!

That doesn’t really make proper  sense now that I read it back, but the gist is that AG is better - no doubt!!

But I think you might be splitting grammatical hairs there Marty!!

Happy Friday Legends!!

 

[BlackSands]

On 11/28/2019 at 8:18 PM, PaddyBrew2 said:

Without kicking off an AG vs extract debate...

Looks like you did!  

To make a claim that one thing is better than another you'd first have to define what a subjective term like "better" actually means.   Factors to consider when claiming "better" in brewing might include for example: time efficiency, process complexity, process enjoyment, cost, and ultimately of course taste and aroma.