Tom S ) wrote:

>"David C Breeden" > wrote in message
...
>> kajolo ) wrote:
>> >Thanks for your explanation, Dave.
>>
>> >However, it's just not clicking with me.
>> >Are you saying that up to 70% of a must might be malic acid, and after a
>> >malolactic fermentation, up to 60% of the malic might be converted to
>> >lactic?
>>
>> No. If 70% of your must is acid of ANY sort, quit and go home.
>> There ain't no wine potential there. And don't splash any on
>> yourself, for fear it'd burn right through you.
>>
>> I'm saying that in a cold climate, you might have 10 g/L acid at
>> harvest, and 7 out of 10 would be malic (adjusted to tartaric
>> equivalents). So you're starting with 1.0% acidity, and 0.7% malic
>> acidity.

>That doesn't sound right to me. Tartaric is the dominant acid in grapes -
>even in grapes with a relatively high proportion of malic acid.

They're not my numbers, but Jackish's.

It's not impossible. We had a wet rainy year this year, and I
harvested ripe (!) Gamay Noir with 13 g/L TA, of which maybe 7 or 8 was
malic.

After much work with acid addition (for pH) and acid reduction (for
taste), it's going into the bottle with ML complete and ~7 g/L TA.

>> After ML, you might have 8 g/L or 0.8 % acidity total, and 0.6%
>> might be malic (6 g/L tartaric equivlents).

>Why wouldn't the ML have gone to completion? Usually it does - especially
>since the rise in pH accompanying ML tends to _promote_ ML.

Maybe for *you*. :-) I've had *lots* of ML's struggle and some fail.

Anyway, I didn't try to balance the numbers, or make claims about
ML completion. I was just trying to make up numbers that would help
the op understand Jackisch.

Dave
>I may have to read the original text - as well as some others. What I've
>read here online doesn't make much sense to me.

>Tom S



--
Dave
************************************************** **************************
Dave Breeden