Jerry

Obviously, your hydrometer is the same as everyone else's. At this
particular moment in time I feel intolerably frustrated. First you come to
this group and arrogate it upon yourself to make a sweeping condemnation
of everything most of us are doing, and then turn right around and say
that you know a better way of doing those same things. You tell us that
making estimates is impossible and then tell us that 0.57 will give us
_better_ estimates. You recommend 0.57 in spite of the fact that 0.55
has been an industry standard for as long as I can remember (and I am
an_old_man) and,_most_of the literature is based on this standard.

We already know that this stuff ain't rocket science and that what we are
doing is making "estimates". If you truly believe that such estimates are
"useless", I suggest that you live by that philosophy and stop making and
using them. But please allow the rest of us to go on doing things the way
we have always done them. We already understand that 0.55 gives us
conservative estimates because all of the literature tells us that. But if
rubber is ever going to meet the road and give us some traction here,
we are going to have to agree on using some kind of standard numbers
and definitions for our terminology. Like it or not, our hydrometers tell
us what that standard currently is. When a newbie who is using a triple
scale hydrometer asks a question, DON'T give them an answer that
contradicts the standard that they are using. It's like speaking in a
foreign
language that they don't understand and only leads to confusion !!

You are free to do things any way you like, but I reserve that same right
for myself and everyone else.

To the others that may be reading this that don't use lab reports,
it is_my_advice that you go right on using your triple scale hydrometers
and _believe_ what they tell you because that is the best tool that is
available to us for practicing our craft. For goodness sake !!
Even_kit_instructions recommend using one.


While I am at this, let me make some comments about your wines. Every
novice soon discovers that "hot" (high alcohol) wines are_not_desirable.
And most "professionals" understand full well the problems encountered
with high alcohol ferments. Seems odd that a person with both experience
and a degree might not know this. You seem to have fallen victim to the
current hype and bull chips that "27 is the new 24". High BRIX grapes
are cheap for a reason. They_don't_make good wine and they cause all
kinds of problems in production !! Unfortunately, you are now finding
this out the hard way and are in the process of reinventing the wheel
(so to speak). The reason you decided not to do MLF on that high
alcohol wine is because you_can't_ !! The commercially available
MLB can't tolerate that much alcohol and strains that could are
_not_desirable and no one in their right mind would risk infecting
a entire winery with an undesirable bug.

At this point you are kinda stuck with your own creations. I think you
may encounter problems in marketing some of them. Customers may
not be very "savvy" about wine, but they_do_know what they do and
don't like.

Let me try to save you some time and anguish. Don't pass "go". Go
directly back to the old "24" rule. I think you will find that all of your
"rocket fuel" and MLF problems will magically disappear. If you play
with the numbers a bit I think you will find that 24 produces about the
upper end of what MLB is really comfortable living with (another
"estimate" of course). I'm sure that you will find that "good" grapes are
far more expensive because a lot of "pros" will be trying to outbid
each other to get their hands on them. It's just part of the cost of doing
business.

I have no diplomas to wave in the air. My only qualification is long
experience. Every one has a right to their own opinion and I am only
expressing mine. I will therefore request: No flames please. HTH

Frederick



"Jerry DeAngelis" wrote in message
ink.net...
Frederick

You are missing my point. In actuality, one can use any factor between
0.55 and 0.60 as that is the inherent, & absolute limitation of the
methodology. If one wants more accurate results, one needs have samples
analyzed in a laboratory.

Regards

Jerry


"frederick ploegman" wrote in message
...
Jerry

Does your triple scale hydrometer have a PA scale on it ? If so, do the
PA numbers that appear there use the 0.57 conversion factor that you
recommend ? If so, where can I get one ?? TIA

Frederick