#1
I hear a lot about stirring lees to help oxygenate it. But if you're
just stirring it around in a bunch of wine, where does the oxygen come
from?

#2
When is lees not gross? For instance, we whole cluster pressed
chardonnay and settled it overnight and there was clearly a dark
(gross) layer and a lighter (fine) layer. However, when I pressed a
fermented red, the lees was a consistent lighter color. Is this
considered gross or fine? Is there a clear distinction between the
two?

....Michael

Michael Brill ) wrote:
>#1
>I hear a lot about stirring lees to help oxygenate it. But if you're
>just stirring it around in a bunch of wine, where does the oxygen come
>from?

Hi Michael,

I think you've got it backwards. People stir Chardonnay aged sur
lie because (for one reasons of many) the lees absorb oxygen, even
more effectively than SO2 does. And since in France, where the
practice is common, SO2 is often not added until after ML finishes
naturally in the spring, this batonnage is really important in
helping prevent oxidation.

I've never heard anyone practice3 batonage to introduce oxygen,
though I suppose stirring always does introduce some oxygen from the
surface above the wine.

Dave
************************************************** **************************
Dave Breeden

Yeah lees stirring takes up O2, it also brings some over desirable flavours
out of the yeast as it breaks down.

Gross lees are any lees that contain solids ex pressing.

Rob L
"David C Breeden" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Brill ) wrote:
> >#1
> >I hear a lot about stirring lees to help oxygenate it. But if you're
> >just stirring it around in a bunch of wine, where does the oxygen come
> >from?
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I think you've got it backwards. People stir Chardonnay aged sur
> lie because (for one reasons of many) the lees absorb oxygen, even
> more effectively than SO2 does. And since in France, where the
> practice is common, SO2 is often not added until after ML finishes
> naturally in the spring, this batonnage is really important in
> helping prevent oxidation.
>
> I've never heard anyone practice3 batonage to introduce oxygen,
> though I suppose stirring always does introduce some oxygen from the
> surface above the wine.
>
> Dave
>
************************************************** **************************
> Dave Breeden

(Michael Brill) wrote:
> #2
> When is lees not gross? For instance, we whole cluster pressed
> chardonnay and settled it overnight and there was clearly a dark
> (gross) layer and a lighter (fine) layer. However, when I pressed a
> fermented red, the lees was a consistent lighter color. Is this
> considered gross or fine? Is there a clear distinction between the
> two?

Yes there is, and I think it's an important one to make.
Gross/heavy lees should include any lees which contains vegetal
particulates (with juice clarification at > 200 NTU in must), tartaric
crystals/yeast/precipitated colloidal matter conglomerates, fining
particulates. Or more generally, particles deposited within 24 hours
and > 100 microns. This lees is not desirable and wines containing it
should be racked off it. Keep in mind that some winemakers clarify
their juice prior to fermentation enough to avoid any of this kind of
lees in their wine.

Light/fine lees is defined as yeast from the end of alcoholic
fermentation and afterwards, and lactic bacteria deposited towards the
end of MLF. Or more generally, particles remaining suspended 24 hours
after the wine has been moved
and 1-10's of microns. This is the lees that we want to stir with.

Obviously I can't see *your* wines but it *sounds like* you have some
gross lees in both the red and the white. I would rack them both. You
could deliberately pick up some of the lighter lees in the white when
you do this if you are sure it would be defined as light/fine lees and
you can control your racking procedure adaquately. For the red, I'd
rack it off any lees whatsoever at this stage.

HTH,
Ben

I wonder if you are mixing up your processes or we are not understanding
your question.

You stir the "must" when you first start fermentation. This introduces
oxygen so the yeast will reproduce and it keeps mold and other nasties from
growing on the cap, the crushed fruit that rises to the top, and it keeps
the cap from drying out and improves extraction.

But if you are talking about after fermentation is over, then you are really
talking about Sur Lie as described above and you certainly are not trying to
introduce O2.

It can be confusing.

Ray

"Michael Brill" > wrote in message
om...
> #1
> I hear a lot about stirring lees to help oxygenate it. But if you're
> just stirring it around in a bunch of wine, where does the oxygen come
> from?
>
> #2
> When is lees not gross? For instance, we whole cluster pressed
> chardonnay and settled it overnight and there was clearly a dark
> (gross) layer and a lighter (fine) layer. However, when I pressed a
> fermented red, the lees was a consistent lighter color. Is this
> considered gross or fine? Is there a clear distinction between the
> two?
>
> ...Michael

On what's been said about the role of oxygen in lees stirring (and of
course I'm talking post fermentation):

I wouldn't say lees stirring is done to oxygenate wine, but I wouldn't
say it's really done for the purposes of absorbing oxygen either -
that's just a useful extra.

Stirring inadvertently adds oxygen to a wine when the barrel/vessel is
opened and the turbulence associated with lees stirring occurs. Whilst
the aim isn't to add oxygen to the wine at stirring, I would say it is
necessary this takes place in the reductive environment created by the
stirring itself.

Ben

(David C Breeden) wrote in message >...
>
> I think you've got it backwards. People stir Chardonnay aged sur
> lie because (for one reasons of many) the lees absorb oxygen, even
> more effectively than SO2 does. And since in France, where the
> practice is common, SO2 is often not added until after ML finishes
> naturally in the spring, this batonnage is really important in
> helping prevent oxidation.
>
Let me try this again. I see at least three reasons to stir lees:

(1) absorb oxygen (i.e., oxygenate) to avoid reductive problems in the
lees such as H2S
(2) get greater exposure of the leesy goodness to the wine
(3) remove oxygen from the wine

I guess the question is really about how much oxygen is in the wine?
I was under the impression that there was very little oxygen in the
wine and therefore stirring up lees in a bunch of oxygen-free wine
wouldn't do much to oxygenate the lees. But it sounds like this may
be wrong... that indeed the wine does contain a meaningful amount of
oxygen that can be absorbed by the lees. Correct?

....Michael

(Ben Rotter) wrote in message . com>...
> Obviously I can't see *your* wines but it *sounds like* you have some
> gross lees in both the red and the white. I would rack them both. You
> could deliberately pick up some of the lighter lees in the white when
> you do this if you are sure it would be defined as light/fine lees and
> you can control your racking procedure adaquately. For the red, I'd
> rack it off any lees whatsoever at this stage.
>
Thanks. Good, I've been wanting to have this conversation. I have
been to many winery websites and have talked to a few winemakers about
racking. Now mind you that most of these conversations have been
about pinot (which is mostly what I've made), but the process I've
heard basically looks like this:

Ferment
Rack directly to barrel
Let it sit for a long time without stirring or racking
Gently (e.g., bulldog pup) rack into nitrogen sparged tank to settle
Bottle

What gives?

Michael Brill ) wrote:
(David C Breeden) wrote in message >...
>>
>> I think you've got it backwards. People stir Chardonnay aged sur
>> lie because (for one reasons of many) the lees absorb oxygen, even
>> more effectively than SO2 does. And since in France, where the
>> practice is common, SO2 is often not added until after ML finishes
>> naturally in the spring, this batonnage is really important in
>> helping prevent oxidation.
>>
>Let me try this again. I see at least three reasons to stir lees:

>(1) absorb oxygen (i.e., oxygenate) to avoid reductive problems in the
>lees such as H2S
>(2) get greater exposure of the leesy goodness to the wine
>(3) remove oxygen from the wine

>I guess the question is really about how much oxygen is in the wine?
>I was under the impression that there was very little oxygen in the
>wine and therefore stirring up lees in a bunch of oxygen-free wine
>wouldn't do much to oxygenate the lees. But it sounds like this may
>be wrong... that indeed the wine does contain a meaningful amount of
>oxygen that can be absorbed by the lees. Correct?

>...Michael


Dunno. I haven't seen your wines. I think the idea is to remove
any oxygen that might be there, since the wine has no SO2 and is
therefore utterly unprotected against oxygen. The strring is done to
expose the wine to the lees, and as an extra added bonus, the
stirring is an antioxidant.

Dave
************************************************** **************************
Dave Breeden

It is my understanding that after fermentation, the dead yeast cells still
contain active enzymes that quickly scavenge any oxygen that the wine would
pick up from periodic stirring. Excessive stirring, however, can introduce
oxygen to a point beyond the capacity of the available enzymes and can cause
oxidation. I currently have a 6 gallon batch of Viognier aging sur lie but
I am stirring it continuously using a magnetic stirrer so I never have to
open the container. I want to see what happens with this degree of stirring
when the risk of oxidation is removed.

"David C Breeden" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Brill ) wrote:
> (David C Breeden) wrote in message
>...
> >>
> >> I think you've got it backwards. People stir Chardonnay aged sur
> >> lie because (for one reasons of many) the lees absorb oxygen, even
> >> more effectively than SO2 does. And since in France, where the
> >> practice is common, SO2 is often not added until after ML finishes
> >> naturally in the spring, this batonnage is really important in
> >> helping prevent oxidation.
> >>
> >Let me try this again. I see at least three reasons to stir lees:
>
> >(1) absorb oxygen (i.e., oxygenate) to avoid reductive problems in the
> >lees such as H2S
> >(2) get greater exposure of the leesy goodness to the wine
> >(3) remove oxygen from the wine
>
> >I guess the question is really about how much oxygen is in the wine?
> >I was under the impression that there was very little oxygen in the
> >wine and therefore stirring up lees in a bunch of oxygen-free wine
> >wouldn't do much to oxygenate the lees. But it sounds like this may
> >be wrong... that indeed the wine does contain a meaningful amount of
> >oxygen that can be absorbed by the lees. Correct?
>
> >...Michael
>
>
> Dunno. I haven't seen your wines. I think the idea is to remove
> any oxygen that might be there, since the wine has no SO2 and is
> therefore utterly unprotected against oxygen. The strring is done to
> expose the wine to the lees, and as an extra added bonus, the
> stirring is an antioxidant.
>
> Dave
>
************************************************** **************************
> Dave Breeden

Michael Brill wrote:
> I guess the question is really about how much oxygen is in the wine?
> I was under the impression that there was very little oxygen in the
> wine and therefore stirring up lees in a bunch of oxygen-free wine
> wouldn't do much to oxygenate the lees. But it sounds like this may
> be wrong... that indeed the wine does contain a meaningful amount of
> oxygen that can be absorbed by the lees. Correct?

How much oxygen the wine contains will depends on how much oxygen
exposure it's had. Different methods of stirring will obviously
introduce different amounts of O2, and the amount of lees (amongst
other things) will determine how much of that O2 is absorbed. Without
a DO meter you really can't get an accurate figure on any of this.
However, I think it's enough to just use common sense and your sense
of smell to detect what stage the wine is at (i.e. whether it's in a
more reductive or oxidative state).

Aaron Puhala wrote:
> oxidation. I currently have a 6 gallon batch of Viognier aging sur lie but
> I am stirring it continuously using a magnetic stirrer so I never have to
> open the container. I want to see what happens with this degree of stirring
> when the risk of oxidation is removed.

I have done in-vessel stirring (i.e. without any opening of the
vessel) and have found that if you keep it up for long enough the wine
will become reductive. If I were you, I'd keep close tabs on the wine
(taste it relatively regularly) to check where it's at.

Ben

Thanks for the tip. I'll make sure I check and provide a little air if
necessary. How did your in-vessel stirred wines turn out? Did you stir
continuously?

"Ben Rotter" > wrote in message
om...
> Michael Brill wrote:
> > I guess the question is really about how much oxygen is in the wine?
> > I was under the impression that there was very little oxygen in the
> > wine and therefore stirring up lees in a bunch of oxygen-free wine
> > wouldn't do much to oxygenate the lees. But it sounds like this may
> > be wrong... that indeed the wine does contain a meaningful amount of
> > oxygen that can be absorbed by the lees. Correct?
>
> How much oxygen the wine contains will depends on how much oxygen
> exposure it's had. Different methods of stirring will obviously
> introduce different amounts of O2, and the amount of lees (amongst
> other things) will determine how much of that O2 is absorbed. Without
> a DO meter you really can't get an accurate figure on any of this.
> However, I think it's enough to just use common sense and your sense
> of smell to detect what stage the wine is at (i.e. whether it's in a
> more reductive or oxidative state).
>
> Aaron Puhala wrote:
> > oxidation. I currently have a 6 gallon batch of Viognier aging sur lie
but
> > I am stirring it continuously using a magnetic stirrer so I never have
to
> > open the container. I want to see what happens with this degree of
stirring
> > when the risk of oxidation is removed.
>
> I have done in-vessel stirring (i.e. without any opening of the
> vessel) and have found that if you keep it up for long enough the wine
> will become reductive. If I were you, I'd keep close tabs on the wine
> (taste it relatively regularly) to check where it's at.
>
> Ben

"Michael Brill" > wrote in message
om...
> Now mind you that most of these conversations have been
> about pinot (which is mostly what I've made), but the process I've
> heard basically looks like this:
>
> Ferment
> Rack directly to barrel
> Let it sit for a long time without stirring or racking
> Gently (e.g., bulldog pup) rack into nitrogen sparged tank to settle
> Bottle
>
> What gives?

If you have been successful with this approach, you've been lucky. FWIW,
I'd recommend that you make a few changes:

> Ferment
> Rack directly to barrel

Obviously, you meant to include pressing. I'd **highly** recommend that you
press to a tank or some other large container and let the heavy stuff settle
out before racking to barrel. That only takes an hour or two, and you'll
leave a lot of potential big problems behind in those gross lees.

> Let it sit for a long time without stirring or racking

That may be OK, but you certainly want to maintain the free SO2 and zero
headspace in the barrel. BTW, tasting while you're topping is _mandatory_
during barrel aging. I'm sure you can live with that. :^)

> Gently (e.g., bulldog pup) rack into nitrogen sparged tank to settle

You forgot to mention fining prior to settling. Pinot Noir may not require
fining for excessive tannin, but I highly recommend a light bentonite fining
at least. There are two reasons for this: (1) Protein stability -
especially in the case of Pinot Noir. This wine tends to throw a protein
haze in the bottle, very much like white wines that haven't been bentonited.
Just 1 pound/1000 gal. of bentonite is sufficient to prevent that in most
Pinots. (2) Improved clarity is a nice side benefit from bentoniting.
Also, I've noticed that bentoniting tends to bring the fruit more to the
fore in Pinot Noir - most noticeably in the nose. Don't ask me why. I
can't rationalize that observation. It's just something I noticed.

> Bottle

Be sure to check and adjust (if necessary) the free SO2 just before
bottling.

Tom S

"David C Breeden" > wrote in message
...
> The strring is done to
> expose the wine to the lees, and as an extra added bonus, the
> stirring is an antioxidant.

One thing nobody's mentioned is that stirring exposes the wine to the
relatively un-extracted oak at the bottom of the barrel.

Tom S

"Tom S" > wrote in message >...
> Obviously, you meant to include pressing. I'd **highly** recommend that you
> press to a tank or some other large container and let the heavy stuff settle
> out before racking to barrel. That only takes an hour or two, and you'll
> leave a lot of potential big problems behind in those gross lees.
>
Yes, sort of. Actually a lot of the wine went directly from the
fermentor to barrel without a stopover in the press. This was done to
minimize oxygen contact and was accomplished by pushing a pasta
strainer down into the must and then taking the wine out of the pasta
strainer! So while there were no seeds or skins, I'm sure there's
quite a bit of other particulate matter in there... but probably no
more than if I pressed and then went straight into barrel. I hear you
on the settling out the gross lees. I'll definitely do some more
research on this before next year.

> > Let it sit for a long time without stirring or racking
>
> That may be OK, but you certainly want to maintain the free SO2 and zero
> headspace in the barrel. BTW, tasting while you're topping is _mandatory_
> during barrel aging. I'm sure you can live with that. :^)
>
Yick. Never touch the stuff. Currently, none of the wines have SO2
additions. I innoculuated a few barrels for MLF and I'll run another
chromotography test next week to see if they're done. My guess is MLF
will be complete and I'll sulfur. For other barrels, I'm letting MLF
take its time and they probably won't complete until Spring.
Obviously these won't have SO2 protection for several more months.
Let's see how it goes this year, but I now know why people innoculate
for MLF - it's a bit nerve wracking.

> You forgot to mention fining prior to settling. Pinot Noir may not require
> fining for excessive tannin, but I highly recommend a light bentonite fining
> at least. There are two reasons for this: (1) Protein stability -
> especially in the case of Pinot Noir. This wine tends to throw a protein
> haze in the bottle, very much like white wines that haven't been bentonited.
> Just 1 pound/1000 gal. of bentonite is sufficient to prevent that in most
> Pinots. (2) Improved clarity is a nice side benefit from bentoniting.
> Also, I've noticed that bentoniting tends to bring the fruit more to the
> fore in Pinot Noir - most noticeably in the nose. Don't ask me why. I
> can't rationalize that observation. It's just something I noticed.
>
Haven't really thought about fining. Again, I've just been reading
what pinot pros do and it seems like the higher end produces don't
fine or filter. BTW, why bentonite and not egg whites or some other
fining material?

....Michael

"Aaron Puhala" > wrote:
> Thanks for the tip. I'll make sure I check and provide a little air if
> necessary. How did your in-vessel stirred wines turn out? Did you stir
> continuously?

I do periodic stirring (usually once every 2-3 days) using a food
turntable (see http://members.tripod.com/~BRotter/Surlie.htm for a
pic).
Stirring has given the wines more body and complexity and I'm quite
happy with the results (though it is a stylistic choice). I have had
some problems with wines going reductive, but if you monitor and
correct when the problem arises there's no problem.

Ben

"Michael Brill" > wrote in message
om...
> Haven't really thought about fining. Again, I've just been reading
> what pinot pros do and it seems like the higher end produces don't
> fine or filter.

That's true, but many of those wines throw a protein haze in the bottle. I
_really_ hate that!

BTW, why bentonite and not egg whites or some other
> fining material?

Bentonite is very specific to proteins that cause cloudiness due to heat
instability. The other fining materials (egg whites, gelatin, isinglass)
are mostly to reduce tannins. All of them tend to promote clarity.

Tom S

Michael Brill wrote:
> Yes, sort of. Actually a lot of the wine went directly from the
> fermentor to barrel without a stopover in the press. This was done to
> minimize oxygen contact and was accomplished by pushing a pasta
> strainer down into the must and then taking the wine out of the pasta
> strainer! So while there were no seeds or skins, I'm sure there's

Maybe I'm not following your procedure properly, but wouldn't this
method (with the strainer) introduce *more* oxygen than simply racking
directly? Why not just wait till the cap rises fully, rack (and press)
to another vessel, wait for particulate settling, then rack to barrel?

> Haven't really thought about fining. Again, I've just been reading
> what pinot pros do and it seems like the higher end produces don't
> fine or filter. BTW, why bentonite and not egg whites or some other
> fining material?

I would say a lot of those pros don't fine in good years when they
have (access to) excellent quality fruit. Bentonite is used for
protein stability, egg whites are used to reduce astringency - they
have different functions. Pinot is particularly susceptible to protein
haze due to its low tannin content. Egg white fining can be
particularly useful for fruit that's perhaps from a worse off year or
that has been slightly over extracted, pulling back a little on the
excess astringency there.

Tom S wrote:
> > Also, I've noticed that bentoniting tends to bring the fruit more to the
> > fore in Pinot Noir - most noticeably in the nose. Don't ask me why. I
> > can't rationalize that observation. It's just something I noticed.

Interesting observation Tom. I don't doubt it really. Isinglass is
widely reputed to give brighter fruit, and I'd incline to agree with
that from experience too.

Ben

(Ben Rotter) wrote in message . com>...
> Maybe I'm not following your procedure properly, but wouldn't this
> method (with the strainer) introduce *more* oxygen than simply racking
> directly? Why not just wait till the cap rises fully, rack (and press)
> to another vessel, wait for particulate settling, then rack to barrel?
>
The goal was to minimize oxygen contact. So I took the strainer (it's
about a foot deep) and pushed it down into/through the cap and then
put a hose into the strainer to rack out. The only oxygen contact was
the very top of the strainer. The strainer kept things like seeds and
skins out. I think this was way less oxygen then putting it through a
press. I also racked most of it into barrel a bit sweet (about 2-3
brix) for extra protection.

>
> I would say a lot of those pros don't fine in good years when they
> have (access to) excellent quality fruit. Bentonite is used for
> protein stability, egg whites are used to reduce astringency - they
> have different functions. Pinot is particularly susceptible to protein
> haze due to its low tannin content. Egg white fining can be
> particularly useful for fruit that's perhaps from a worse off year or
> that has been slightly over extracted, pulling back a little on the
> excess astringency there.
>
So, despite being a winemaking neophyte, I actually was able to track
down shockingly good fruit. But it sounds like I should definitely do
some trials with bentonite to see how it impacts clarity and taste.

....Michael

"Michael Brill" > wrote in message
om...
> The goal was to minimize oxygen contact. So I took the strainer (it's
> about a foot deep) and pushed it down into/through the cap and then
> put a hose into the strainer to rack out. The only oxygen contact was
> the very top of the strainer. The strainer kept things like seeds and
> skins out. I think this was way less oxygen then putting it through a
> press. I also racked most of it into barrel a bit sweet (about 2-3
> brix) for extra protection.

At that stage of the process, the wine can actually benefit from a bit of
aeration/splashing. That helps to release the dissolved CO2, as well as the
traces of H2S that are produced in all fermentations. Once the wine is in
barrel it becomes more important to guard against air exposure, although
big, tannic reds are less sensitive than Pinot Noir.

From what I've gleaned from your comments in this thread, it sounds like you
went into barrel rather dirty. I'd recommend that you rack now or very soon
to get the wine off its gross lees. Leaving all that vegetable matter in
there won't improve your wine, and you may find the opposite true when it is
too late. Be sure to sulfite if ML is finished. My 2¢ worth.

Tom S

"Tom S" > wrote in message m>...
> At that stage of the process, the wine can actually benefit from a bit of
> aeration/splashing. That helps to release the dissolved CO2, as well as the
> traces of H2S that are produced in all fermentations. Once the wine is in
> barrel it becomes more important to guard against air exposure, although
> big, tannic reds are less sensitive than Pinot Noir.
>
> From what I've gleaned from your comments in this thread, it sounds like you
> went into barrel rather dirty. I'd recommend that you rack now or very soon
> to get the wine off its gross lees. Leaving all that vegetable matter in
> there won't improve your wine, and you may find the opposite true when it is
> too late. Be sure to sulfite if ML is finished. My 2¢ worth.
>
So the counter-argument is that the CO2 that remains in the wine
protects it and reduces SO2 requirements. I've seen this in a few
places - most notably the Beaux Freres website
(http://www.beauxfreres.com/technique.htm). Most of my research has
been around pinot where the cool kids seem to age on gross lees and
never rack. I understand this is dangerous (as I've experienced with
a barrel of syrah), but the argument is that the lees does improve the
wine. Like most of winemaking I've found that there are always two
contrary opinions from people whose opinions I respect. It's quite
maddening.

(Michael Brill) wrote in message . com>...

> Like most of winemaking I've found that there are always two
> contrary opinions from people whose opinions I respect. It's quite
> maddening.

But if everyone made wine the same way, the world would be much less interesting :-)

Andy