Triple Fermented?? But Why?

I don't know about three sugar additions and haven't explored Belgian styles that much, but I can see where the idea of primary-secondary-bottle conditioning with a yeast addition somewhere makes sense.

Some yeasts ferment sugars that lager/ale yeasts don't ferment. Brettanomyces is a slow-acting yeast, so people don't like to put it in the primary but do like to use it for conditioning.* But since it ferments sugars that aren't usually fermented by lager/ale yeast it is dangerous for bottle conditioning because you end up with more CO2 for the same amount of priming sugar if you bottle condition with a Brett addition. To get around this Brett will be added to the secondary to pre-condition before normal bottle conditioning ensues.

Another thing is possibly just an emergency intervention, but if you lager and kill your yeast off with cold you may want to add another yeast back for bottle conditioning.

To answer the bulleted questions:

• Varies big time. Adjuncts can be added to the secondary, for instance, so you get some more sugar that way sometimes.

• Probably varies, depending on style or preference, but with a second pitching there usually isn't much fermentable sugar left, so you don't go crazy. I'd probably make a quarter liter starter if I did a Brett addition to secondary.

• One possibility, with Brett, is a more dry finish. It's noted for being somewhat sour, though this should be subtle in secondary fermentation. Sometimes bottled beers, even ales, contain added lager yeast for long-term storage and conditioning. I haven't tried this, but maybe lager yeasts in bottle conditioning give you a cleaner finish?

(*) I have only non-Belgian experience with it, but Brett is popular in some Belgian/lambic styles.

Apart from changing yeast and preserving flavor, there is also a third reason. if some beer style calls for sucrose, candi sugar et cetera, adding it directly to the boil may make yeast "lazy". Glucose, fructose and corn sugar tends to be fermented first, before maltose is. Worse, yeast that fermented a lot of easier sugars may lose the ability to process maltose, leaving you with a stuck fermentation. So allowing maltose be fermented, and only then adding easier sugars for secondary fermentation makes a lot of sense and may result with drier, more alcoholic final result.

The phrase triple fermentation had me scratching my head wondering what that was. And then on the recent blood moon, a dead batch of beer I had moved a couple days earlier to clarify, came roaring back to life, it too died, then came back to life again. And yes, there was triple yeast mix added from start.

Some yeasts will give you a very potent product - up to 14% alcohol - but you do not get a particularly pleasant flavor if you use them.

If you try to brew from the start using potent yeast, the beer does not taste like anything you would meet normally - it has a musty odor and taste. That is why more than one yeast is used (sometimes they stop at two and call the beer a doppel).

If you first brew with a beer yeast until the gas coming off is fading, then add a stronger lager yeast and leave that until the gas coming off is fading, then add a wine yeast, give it a couple of days, filter and bottle it - you get to the "Tripel" concept that the Belgians love - a beer that tastes acceptable with a kick like a mule".

Of course, that final filtration must not filter out all the yeast, just the lumpy stuff ... You need a little yeast left in to condition the beer, or it will be flat.

I think fruit beers are a great example of triple fermented beers, usually wheat, but adding the fruit to the secondary allows for a more gentle fermentation of the fruit leaving behind more of the fruit flavor. This is very common in lambics and heffeweizens.

As far as the beer you saw, I wonder if they just added honey or something, I don't know that this would change the flavor much, although it would keep the OG lower allowing the yeast to do it's job a little easier.

I do however completely understand now (having done this wrong before) why you would add the fruit after initial fermentation to preserve more of the fruit flavor in the beer.

Over on Homebrewtalk the opinion seems to be that it's a beer that has had fermentables added to it twice after the initial brewing.

It's fermented once, moved to a secondary where a new fermentable is added & perhaps some different yeast. That's the second fermentation. Then more fermentables are added and it's bottled. The bottle conditioning is the third fermentation.

From my understanding, a few Belgian beers use a second yeast strain during bottle conditioning. This is to impart a different and unique flavor to the final beer. In that case, that would be 'double fermentation'. I've never noticed a 'triple fermented' beer.

But I imagine that you have two choices when 'triple fermenting'.

One is to add a fresh batch of the same strain of yeast in at secondary. The advantage of this is that a freshly made batch of yeast would be very active and could drop the FG a few more points than the original yeast could. This would yield a dryer and more alcoholic final beer.

The second option is to add another strain of yeast at secondary. This would of course change the flavor profile. And potential affect the final gravity.

If the second option is taken and it is the same yeast as bottle conditioning, then you get no real benefit in my mind.

If the second option is taken and a third strain is added at bottle conditioning, then you might get something unique.

If the first option is taken you could at least get more alcohol, if that is your aim.

All in all, it sounds like a lot of work and cost for no real benefit.

The flip side to this argument is that I've had a lot of really good Belgian beers, so they probably know what they are doing. =)

What are the effects? Pretty much none, really.