![]() |
|
Welcome to FoodBanter.com forums which provide access to the finest food and drink related newsgroups. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most newsgroup discussions and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics to the food related newsgroups, communicate privately with other FoodBanter.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support. |
|
|||||||
| Winemaking (rec.crafts.winemaking) Discussion of the process, recipes, tips, techniques and general exchange of lore on the process, methods and history of wine making. Includes traditional grape wines, sparkling wines & champagnes. |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
Hi there.
I just bought 250 pounds of Peter Brehm cabernet grapes from northern California. They were harvested September 21 with a Brix of 26.5, pH of 3.41 and TA of 7.95 grams/litre. The brix seems a little high as does the acid. Any suggestions on how you would adjust this must? Just ferment out and ML and cold stabalize to reduce acid? Should I add acidulated water to bring the brix down? Or just plain water? Any advice appreciated. Dan Emerson |
|
|||
|
"Dan Emerson" wrote in message om... Hi there. I just bought 250 pounds of Peter Brehm cabernet grapes from northern California. They were harvested September 21 with a Brix of 26.5, pH of 3.41 and TA of 7.95 grams/litre. The brix seems a little high as does the acid. Any suggestions on how you would adjust this must? Just ferment out and ML and cold stabalize to reduce acid? Should I add acidulated water to bring the brix down? Or just plain water? Any advice appreciated. Dan Emerson Dan, If you like "big," red wines, I would wouldn't add anything but SO2 and yeast (use a high alcohol yeast like Prise de Mousse). lum |
|
|||
|
"Dan Emerson" wrote:
I just bought 250 pounds of Peter Brehm cabernet grapes from northern California. They were harvested September 21 with a Brix of 26.5, pH of 3.41 and TA of 7.95 grams/litre. The brix seems a little high as does the acid. Any suggestions on how you would adjust this must? Just ferment out and ML and cold stabalize to reduce acid? Should I add acidulated water to bring the brix down? Or just plain water? First, retest the sugar, pH and acid, before any adjustments. Mistakes can be made. The Brix is a bit high (about 15.5% p.a.). If you use an alcohol-tolerant yeast, you can reduce the alcohol level by stirring the must somewhat vigorously during fermentation. Depends how low you want to get it. The pH is ideal (IMO) for a cabernet, and I would be hesitant to adjust it at all. If you reduce it very much, it will be more difficult to initiate malolactic fermentation. The acid is about .15 higher than I would like to have for a cabernet, but it should come down during fermentation, cold stabilization, and malolactic fermentation. How much is anyone's guess, but it's not unreasonable to expect a .15 reduction. If you do decide to reduce the Brix via dilution, I think plain (or distilled) water would be better than acidulated, since that will reduce the TA a bit. Acidulated would increase it. |
|
|||
|
"Dan Emerson" wrote in message om... Hi there. I just bought 250 pounds of Peter Brehm cabernet grapes from northern California. They were harvested September 21 with a Brix of 26.5, pH of 3.41 and TA of 7.95 grams/litre. The brix seems a little high as does the acid. Any suggestions on how you would adjust this must? Just ferment out and ML and cold stabalize to reduce acid? Should I add acidulated water to bring the brix down? Or just plain water? Any advice appreciated. Although the Brix is a little high, the other numbers are *perfect*! Should make a big Cabernet. Don't mess with it; just ferment it as is. Tom S |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
"Dan Emerson" wrote:
I generally press when the brix is zero, or the gravity is 1.0 or less. There is usually still a cap. Should I wait until the cap falls? I've heard about falling cap but have never seen this. Impatient or a worry wart I guess. A "standard practice" is to press when the Brix falls to 0, or soon thereafter. Others press around 1.010. Others wait until the cap "falls" (or more accurately, sinks), and there are no more floating solids. Others wait 3-4 weeks (which takes special methods to protect the wine from oxidation). The longer you wait, the more extraction of colour, flavour, and tannin, will occur, and the heavier a wine will result. And the longer you wait to press, the longer you will have to wait to drink the wine, since extended maceration usually means much more aging is required. If I wait until the cap falls, do I have to use an inert gas? What about pressing after the cap falls. Pressing seems so violent. As long as the cap is floating, the fermentation is producing enough CO2 to protect the wine in the primary, and there is no need to use an inert gas. Once the cap sinks, the ferment is probably complete, or very close to being complete, and you should press imediately (or take steps to protect the wine from air). I don't understand the reference to violence. First, one should always press gently, and secondly, you have to press sometime, and it's no more violent before the cap drops than afterwards. When I press, I generally scoop the whole mess, juice and pulp into the press and press away. Should I try to try to wait until the cap falls and try to draw off the juice from the pulp before pressing? You are using the correct procedure. There is no need to "try to draw off the juice from the pulp before pressing", nor would it be possible without straining. Even though the pulp is no longer floating, it is still suspended throughout the must. If you waited for it to sink to the bottom, and clear, then you would be asking for problems. However, you should use a press bag or fiberglass screening in the press, and pour the juice through it, letting the solids accumulate in the press basket. Only when there is no more free-run juice, should you begin pressing, and then as gently as possible. It takes longer, but hard-pressing will force undesireable tannins and bitter flavours from the skins. Some people separate the free-run juice from the pressed juice (and then combine it later), but I don't see the point in this. I want my wines, cabernet and pinot, to have that big mouth feel (which at least my Pinot doesn't have) and I think my past pressing practices may play a part. Also, I don't use barrels, and that may be part of it too. There are many factors in achieving "mouth feel". Barrel aging imparts tannin (which can be simulated with oak chips) and a mellowness which cannot be duplicated. But barrels are expensive and more trouble than glass or stainless steel carboys, so one must decide how important that mellowness is to them. Here are some recent threads on the subject: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...fts.winemaking |
|
|||
|
"Negodki" wrote in message ... "Dan Emerson" wrote: I generally press when the brix is zero, or the gravity is 1.0 or less. There is usually still a cap. Should I wait until the cap falls? I've heard about falling cap but have never seen this. Impatient or a worry wart I guess. A "standard practice" is to press when the Brix falls to 0, or soon thereafter. Others press around 1.010. Others wait until the cap "falls" (or more accurately, sinks), and there are no more floating solids. Others wait 3-4 weeks (which takes special methods to protect the wine from oxidation). The "special methods" aren't all that complicated. It's just a matter of keeping air away from the wine and stirring the must to keep it from going reductive (H2S). I spritz the top of the must and then smooth a trash bag down against the surface of the must. Laying a few pieces of wood down on the plastic to keep it in contact with the wine helps. That keeps air away pretty well. The longer you wait, the more extraction of colour, flavour, and tannin, will occur, and the heavier a wine will result. And the longer you wait to press, the longer you will have to wait to drink the wine, since extended maceration usually means much more aging is required. That's not necessarily true. Pressing at zero Brix will tend to yield a wine with harsher tannins than pressing a couple of weeks beyond dryness. The extended maceration encourages polymerization of harsh tannins into big, soft tannins. Also, the color tends to be reabsorbed by the pulp during extended maceration. If I wait until the cap falls, do I have to use an inert gas? What about pressing after the cap falls. Pressing seems so violent. Pressing isn't a problem. The aeration is good for a young wine - especially a red. Prior to and after pressing it is necessary to take protective measures with the wine (topping up, inert gas, sulfiting), but not while you're actually pressing it. As long as the cap is floating, the fermentation is producing enough CO2 to protect the wine in the primary, and there is no need to use an inert gas. Not true! The low rate of CO2 production may lure you into a false sense of security, but if the CO2 gassing is not _considerable_, the surface of the must is a good breeding ground for all the spoilage organisms. They only need a _little_ bit of air to survive and then thrive. Once the cap sinks, the ferment is probably complete, or very close to being complete, and you should press imediately (or take steps to protect the wine from air). I don't understand the reference to violence. First, one should always press gently, and secondly, you have to press sometime, and it's no more violent before the cap drops than afterwards. I tend to agree, but I always press a good deal harder than _gently_. There's a lot of good stuff in the heavy press fraction. It might be advisable to keep the heavy press fraction separate for awhile - possibly for a different fining regimen than the free run and light press wine - but I usually end up incorporating it into the main lot. When I press, I generally scoop the whole mess, juice and pulp into the press and press away. Should I try to try to wait until the cap falls and try to draw off the juice from the pulp before pressing? You are using the correct procedure. There is no need to "try to draw off the juice from the pulp before pressing", nor would it be possible without straining. Even though the pulp is no longer floating, it is still suspended throughout the must. If you waited for it to sink to the bottom, and clear, then you would be asking for problems. However, you should use a press bag or fiberglass screening in the press, and pour the juice through it, letting the solids accumulate in the press basket. Only when there is no more free-run juice, should you begin pressing, and then as gently as possible. It takes longer, but hard-pressing will force undesireable tannins and bitter flavours from the skins. Some people separate the free-run juice from the pressed juice (and then combine it later), but I don't see the point in this. See my comments above re differential fining. I want my wines, cabernet and pinot, to have that big mouth feel (which at least my Pinot doesn't have) and I think my past pressing practices may play a part. Also, I don't use barrels, and that may be part of it too. There are many factors in achieving "mouth feel". Barrel aging imparts tannin (which can be simulated with oak chips) and a mellowness which cannot be duplicated. But barrels are expensive and more trouble than glass or stainless steel carboys, so one must decide how important that mellowness is to them. The best way to get oak character into glass or stainless fermented wines is to ferment with wood chips in the primary, and carry them along as long as necessary to achieve the desired effect. Sure, barrels are better but you can do _very_ well with just chips and an occasional racking. Tom S |
|
|||
|
"Tom S" wrote:
The "special methods" aren't all that complicated. It's just a matter of keeping air away from the wine and stirring the must to keep it from going reductive (H2S). I spritz the top of the must and then smooth a trash bag down against the surface of the must. Laying a few pieces of wood down on the plastic to keep it in contact with the wine helps. That keeps air away pretty well. Rather than "spritzing", why not just push the cap down below "water level"? But how do you stir the must during an extended maceration without exposing it to air? Or is the small amount of exposure during stirring insignificant? That's not necessarily true. Pressing at zero Brix will tend to yield a wine with harsher tannins than pressing a couple of weeks beyond dryness. The extended maceration encourages polymerization of harsh tannins into big, soft tannins. Also, the color tends to be reabsorbed by the pulp during extended maceration. I didn't know about the tannins. I had heard about the colour lightening somewhat during extended maceration, but hadn't heard the reason. Thank you. How long do you extend the maceration? Do you just let it continue until it "tastes right"? Not true! The low rate of CO2 production may lure you into a false sense of security, but if the CO2 gassing is not _considerable_, the surface of the must is a good breeding ground for all the spoilage organisms. They only need a _little_ bit of air to survive and then thrive. Isn't that taken care of by pushing the cap down, and stirring the must? If not, at what stage does the must require "special methods" of protection from air? I tend to agree, but I always press a good deal harder than _gently_. There's a lot of good stuff in the heavy press fraction. It might be advisable to keep the heavy press fraction separate for awhile - possibly for a different fining regimen than the free run and light press wine - but I usually end up incorporating it into the main lot. Yeah, I also try to get that last "little" bit out, especially since it isn't so little. It usually comes out well-filtered and almost clear (since it has had to pass through all the compacted pulp). But I figured this hard-pressing was "not recommended". |
|
|||
|
"Negodki" wrote in message ... "Tom S" wrote: The "special methods" aren't all that complicated. It's just a matter of keeping air away from the wine and stirring the must to keep it from going reductive (H2S). I spritz the top of the must and then smooth a trash bag down against the surface of the must. Laying a few pieces of wood down on the plastic to keep it in contact with the wine helps. That keeps air away pretty well. Rather than "spritzing", why not just push the cap down below "water level"? I do, but even at dryness the cap tends to float up again - probably because of ML activity/gassing. But how do you stir the must during an extended maceration without exposing it to air? Or is the small amount of exposure during stirring insignificant? The short exposures are not significant. Besides, a little aeration is good for the new wine. It helps release the small amounts of H2S that are present in healthy fermentations. That's not necessarily true. Pressing at zero Brix will tend to yield a wine with harsher tannins than pressing a couple of weeks beyond dryness. The extended maceration encourages polymerization of harsh tannins into big, soft tannins. Also, the color tends to be reabsorbed by the pulp during extended maceration. I didn't know about the tannins. I had heard about the colour lightening somewhat during extended maceration, but hadn't heard the reason. Thank you. How long do you extend the maceration? Do you just let it continue until it "tastes right"? Pretty much, but schedule of when the next opportunity for pressing is also a factor. IOW, if Saturday is three days past 0° Brix, I'll probably press at ten days. Not true! The low rate of CO2 production may lure you into a false sense of security, but if the CO2 gassing is not _considerable_, the surface of the must is a good breeding ground for all the spoilage organisms. They only need a _little_ bit of air to survive and then thrive. Isn't that taken care of by pushing the cap down, and stirring the must? If not, at what stage does the must require "special methods" of protection from air? Once the must is no longer gassing vigorously it's time to be more careful about air exposure. That's when I start spritzing with SO2 after the last punchdown before going to bed. I tend to agree, but I always press a good deal harder than _gently_. There's a lot of good stuff in the heavy press fraction. It might be advisable to keep the heavy press fraction separate for awhile - possibly for a different fining regimen than the free run and light press wine - but I usually end up incorporating it into the main lot. Yeah, I also try to get that last "little" bit out, especially since it isn't so little. It usually comes out well-filtered and almost clear (since it has had to pass through all the compacted pulp). But I figured this hard-pressing was "not recommended". It's strictly a matter of style. I remember that Joe Heitz did not separate the press fraction of his "Martha's Vineyard" Cabernet from the free run. That's good enough for me! Tom S |
|
|||
|
In article ,
"Tom S" wrote: The best way to get oak character into glass or stainless fermented wines is to ferment with wood chips in the primary, and carry them along as long as necessary to achieve the desired effect. Sure, barrels are better but you can do _very_ well with just chips and an occasional racking. Tom S As a home winemaker doing relatively small batches (5 gallons), I am curious about this. I would like to impart oak in some of my wines, but barrels I think are not a good option for these small batches. Thus, I will experiement with chips. I have seen several people here suggest that it is best to put the oak chips in the primary prior to fermentation. But, isn't this actually not what is done with most wines? Are not most commercial wines fermented in vats or steel tanks and then placed into barrels for aging and oaking after primary fermentation? Would not a similar (as much as possible) oaking take place if chips were added after primary? I would definitely appreciate any comments about the differences between adding chips before or after fermentation - pros, cons? Thanks. -- Greg Cook http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine (remove spamblocker from my email address) |
|
|||
|
"Greg Cook" wrote in message ... In article , "Tom S" wrote: The best way to get oak character into glass or stainless fermented wines is to ferment with wood chips in the primary, and carry them along as long as necessary to achieve the desired effect. Sure, barrels are better but you can do _very_ well with just chips and an occasional racking. Tom S As a home winemaker doing relatively small batches (5 gallons), I am curious about this. I would like to impart oak in some of my wines, but barrels I think are not a good option for these small batches. Thus, I will experiement with chips. I have seen several people here suggest that it is best to put the oak chips in the primary prior to fermentation. But, isn't this actually not what is done with most wines? Are not most commercial wines fermented in vats or steel tanks and then placed into barrels for aging and oaking after primary fermentation? Would not a similar (as much as possible) oaking take place if chips were added after primary? I would definitely appreciate any comments about the differences between adding chips before or after fermentation - pros, cons? Thanks. -- Greg Cook http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine (remove spamblocker from my email address) I know of at least one commercial winery that puts some oak chips in the primary fermentatin bins and then pumps into somewhat old barrels after pressing. I think it all depends on the age of the barrels and how much oak extraction is wanted. I think the oak has a better chance of "integrating" if some is put in the primary fermentation. |
|
|||
|
"Paul E. Lehmann" wrote in message ... I know of at least one commercial winery that puts some oak chips in the primary fermentatin bins and then pumps into somewhat old barrels after pressing. I think it all depends on the age of the barrels and how much oak extraction is wanted. I think the oak has a better chance of "integrating" if some is put in the primary fermentation. Exactly right! That's why barrel fermented Chardonnay (e.g.) tastes different from tank fermented Chardonnay that is subsequently barrel aged. The oak flavor is more tightly integrated into the structure of the wine - partly at least because the yeast tends to fine the harsh wood tannins. Tom S |
|
|||
|
Greg,
I used to just add the Oak after Primary so I could monitor the "oakiness" of the wine. I since, on the advice of Tom S started adding a handful of Oak to 5-6 gal (french in my case) to the primary, and lightly rinsing it at racking and then add it back into the racked wine. The best way I can describe the difference is that it was a lot smoother tasting and seemed as you said more "intergrated" into the wine. My concern initially was that how much do you want to "over oak" the wine before enough is enough to get it right after it mellows out? For me that was hard to judge because I was not used to Oaking my wine as a general rule. In conclusion I have decided that the oak seems more naturally intergrated into the wine when it is added from the start versus later on. Yes you can judge the oak more readily when it is added after fermentation, but the taste is definitely more course when the oak is added later on in my trials. The tip from Tom S in regard to Oaking in my opinion is dead on. HTH John Dixon "Tom S" wrote in message om... "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote in message ... I know of at least one commercial winery that puts some oak chips in the primary fermentatin bins and then pumps into somewhat old barrels after pressing. I think it all depends on the age of the barrels and how much oak extraction is wanted. I think the oak has a better chance of "integrating" if some is put in the primary fermentation. Exactly right! That's why barrel fermented Chardonnay (e.g.) tastes different from tank fermented Chardonnay that is subsequently barrel aged. The oak flavor is more tightly integrated into the structure of the wine - partly at least because the yeast tends to fine the harsh wood tannins. Tom S |
|
|||
|
In article ,
"J Dixon" wrote: Greg, I used to just add the Oak after Primary so I could monitor the "oakiness" of the wine. I since, on the advice of Tom S started adding a handful of Oak to 5-6 gal (french in my case) to the primary, and lightly rinsing it at racking and then add it back into the racked wine. The best way I can describe the difference is that it was a lot smoother tasting and seemed as you said more "intergrated" into the wine. My concern initially was that how much do you want to "over oak" the wine before enough is enough to get it right after it mellows out? For me that was hard to judge because I was not used to Oaking my wine as a general rule. In conclusion I have decided that the oak seems more naturally intergrated into the wine when it is added from the start versus later on. Yes you can judge the oak more readily when it is added after fermentation, but the taste is definitely more course when the oak is added later on in my trials. The tip from Tom S in regard to Oaking in my opinion is dead on. HTH John Dixon "Tom S" wrote in message om... "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote in message ... I know of at least one commercial winery that puts some oak chips in the primary fermentatin bins and then pumps into somewhat old barrels after pressing. I think it all depends on the age of the barrels and how much oak extraction is wanted. I think the oak has a better chance of "integrating" if some is put in the primary fermentation. Exactly right! That's why barrel fermented Chardonnay (e.g.) tastes different from tank fermented Chardonnay that is subsequently barrel aged. The oak flavor is more tightly integrated into the structure of the wine - partly at least because the yeast tends to fine the harsh wood tannins. Tom S Excellent information. Thanks for the comments. Would it be safe to say that oaking after fermentation should be done more conservatively since it doesn't integrate as well? -- Greg Cook http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine (remove spamblocker from my email address) |
|
|||
|
Greg,
I am of the opinion that you are correct, but I dont have the trials/research to back these assumptions. All I can say is that through my experieces that adding oak later... well it tastes like oak instead of an intergral part of the wine. Just my experience which I think is important, but not the difinitive answer as wine making is a very fluid and developing process. Someone might like the taste of an oak plank.... I do not. HTH John Dixon "Greg Cook" wrote in message ... In article , "J Dixon" wrote: Greg, I used to just add the Oak after Primary so I could monitor the "oakiness" of the wine. I since, on the advice of Tom S started adding a handful of Oak to 5-6 gal (french in my case) to the primary, and lightly rinsing it at racking and then add it back into the racked wine. The best way I can describe the difference is that it was a lot smoother tasting and seemed as you said more "intergrated" into the wine. My concern initially was that how much do you want to "over oak" the wine before enough is enough to get it right after it mellows out? For me that was hard to judge because I was not used to Oaking my wine as a general rule. In conclusion I have decided that the oak seems more naturally intergrated into the wine when it is added from the start versus later on. Yes you can judge the oak more readily when it is added after fermentation, but the taste is definitely more course when the oak is added later on in my trials. The tip from Tom S in regard to Oaking in my opinion is dead on. HTH John Dixon "Tom S" wrote in message om... "Paul E. Lehmann" wrote in message ... I know of at least one commercial winery that puts some oak chips in the primary fermentatin bins and then pumps into somewhat old barrels after pressing. I think it all depends on the age of the barrels and how much oak extraction is wanted. I think the oak has a better chance of "integrating" if some is put in the primary fermentation. Exactly right! That's why barrel fermented Chardonnay (e.g.) tastes different from tank fermented Chardonnay that is subsequently barrel aged. The oak flavor is more tightly integrated into the structure of the wine - partly at least because the yeast tends to fine the harsh wood tannins. Tom S Excellent information. Thanks for the comments. Would it be safe to say that oaking after fermentation should be done more conservatively since it doesn't integrate as well? -- Greg Cook http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine (remove spamblocker from my email address) |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Cabernet Notes | Bill Spohn | Wine | 9 | 27-05-2004 04:06 PM |
| FYI, Ridge 2003 cabernet | Max Hauser | Wine | 2 | 24-05-2004 07:32 AM |
| Pan-Seared Steak with Cabernet Butter Sauce | Chef2Chef Recipe Club | Recipes (moderated) | 0 | 19-04-2004 05:03 AM |
| cooling pinot and cabernet in fridge? | JZ | Wine | 5 | 17-02-2004 04:41 PM |
| cooling pinot and cabernet in fridge? | LRW | Wine | 0 | 17-02-2004 02:06 AM |