|
wine/vinegar reductions experiment
all the cooking technique books i read tell about taking wine or balsamic vinegar and slowing heating (sometimes boiling) the solution so water is removed and flavor increased by concentrating the flavors. main problem is how to remove water from wine/vinegar solutions without destroying flavor. i do not have any idea how the commercial companies make reductions heating these solutions would drive off very subtle flavors and really is not the ideal way to do it. since i do not have a freeze dry machine or a vacuum still ( this would allow you to use very little heat and water would be driven off by actually boiling the liquid at a very low temperature. freezing the solution and frequently removing the water ( ice) might be ok. one solution which i am now going to play with is to use sausage casing to act as a membrane that allows water vapor to go thru but not the good stuff ( a gore tex tube would really work nice--i think) anyway using large collagen casing i have place balsamic vinegar and wine into separate casing and placed them outside---i like the idea of using fresh air to remove water. so far it seems that some of the wine/vinegar is diffusing out of the casings but will continue to see what happens. i have ordered dialysis tubing which might be a great way to do this. keep tuned peter |
ilaboo wrote:
> > > all the cooking technique books i read tell about taking wine or > balsamic vinegar and slowing heating (sometimes boiling) the solution > so water is removed and flavor increased by concentrating the flavors. > > main problem is how to remove water from wine/vinegar solutions > without destroying flavor. > > i do not have any idea how the commercial companies make reductions > > > heating these solutions would drive off very subtle flavors and really > is not the ideal way to do it. > > > since i do not have a freeze dry machine or a vacuum still ( this > would allow you to use very little heat and water would be driven off > by actually boiling the liquid at a very low temperature. > > > > > > > freezing the solution and frequently removing the water ( ice) might > be ok. > > one solution which i am now going to play with is to use sausage > casing to act as a membrane that allows water vapor to go thru but not > the good stuff > > ( a gore tex tube would really work nice--i think) > > anyway > using large collagen casing i have place balsamic vinegar and wine > into separate casing and placed them outside---i like the idea of > using fresh air to remove water. > > > so far it seems that some of the wine/vinegar is diffusing out of the > casings but will continue to see what happens. > > > i have ordered dialysis tubing which might be a great way to do this. > > > keep tuned > > > peter Some interesting concepts but I retired from the dialysis industry last year and never heard of dialysis "tubing". If you're talking about the semi permeable membrane within the dialyzer, be advised that most of the materials used today are for Hi-Flux dialysis and the pores are huge....almost big enough to spill protein. The older dialyzers were made from cellulose acetate and the pores were much smaller....so....if you can find it, cellophane might work. (And be cheaper.) Bubba -- You wanna measure, or you wanna cook? |
Bubba wrote:
> >> >> >> > > > Some interesting concepts but I retired from the dialysis industry last > year and never heard of dialysis "tubing". > tried to find cellophane tubing to no avail--maybe should look for bags dialysis tuping is used to coincentrate protein solutions--comes in various molecular weight passing or pore sizes got some coming from ebay but needs to soaked in chelating chemical to remover traces of haavy metals dialysis tubing is a catch all for tubing used like this i think it's going to be a neat way to create reductions--i always wanted a kitchen with salami etc hanging from the ceiling--the casing hanging on my closesline is freaking some people out!! hth peter |
ilaboo wrote:
looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original |
ilaboo wrote:
looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original |
ilaboo wrote:
looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original |
ilaboo wrote:
> ilaboo wrote: > > looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn > > will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How are you making that determination? What was beginning pH? Present pH? Pastorio |
ilaboo wrote:
> ilaboo wrote: > > looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn > > will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How are you making that determination? What was beginning pH? Present pH? Pastorio |
ilaboo wrote:
> ilaboo wrote: > > looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn > > will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How are you making that determination? What was beginning pH? Present pH? Pastorio |
making only a concentration
should have checked ph of the wine --have ph paper as i see it a reduction is reducting the volumne of the liqid by driving of water usually by gentle heat it's the heat i am trying to avoid heat not only drives out water but a bunch of volitile components and probably carmelizes ( have to look up chemistry of that) or hydolizes various sugars --which may or not be agood thing seems so far working out rather well ( did not taste any of it yet!!) stay tuned peter |
ilaboo wrote:
> making only a concentration > > should have checked ph of the wine --have ph paper > > as i see it a reduction is reducting the volumne of the liqid by driving > of water usually by gentle heat Right. ANd lots of other stuff, too. That's why you can smell it. If it were just water; no smell. > it's the heat i am trying to avoid > > heat not only drives out water but a bunch of volitile components and > probably carmelizes ( have to look up chemistry of that) or hydolizes > various sugars --which may or not be agood thing So without any basis for the decision, you've decided to avoid heat. Good thinking. Sorta. > seems so far working out rather well ( did not taste any of it yet!!) > stay tuned Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid. Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved. Pastorio |
Bob Pastorio egged Peter on:
> Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your > decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the > excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you > just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid. > Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved. Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do just that. Bob |
Bob wrote:
> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on: > >>Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your >>decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the >>excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you >>just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid. >>Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved. > > Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the > water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that > Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do > just that. I bet he'd appreciate some URL's that would offer him such equipment. Have your people get right on that, ok? There is already available a full range of commercial products from vinegar concentrates (very syrupy) to spray-dried vinegar powder. This latest exercise from Peter is reinventing the wheel to drive to the beginning of reinventing yet another wheel. I mean home science projects are all well and good. I do my share of them and I suspect you do as well. But I do ask a few questions first and adjust my thinking based on facts obtained. Oh, well..Tis the season to be jolly and all. Pastorio |
Bob wrote:
> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on: > > >>Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your >>decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the >>excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you >>just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid. >>Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved. > > > Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the > water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that > Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do > just that. > > Bob > > i agree ideal weay would be to freeze dry it--once did it took a gallon of wine and got it down to about 2 ml--used it to seperate out the sugars using column chromatography lab looked like a rainbow of tubes beautiful!!! |
Bob (this one) wrote:
> Bob wrote: > >> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on: >> >>> Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for >>> your >>> decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out >>> the >>> excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you >>> just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid. >>> Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved. >> >> >> Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the >> water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure >> that >> Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him >> to do just that. > > > I bet he'd appreciate some URL's that would offer him such equipment. > Have your people get right on that, ok? > > There is already available a full range of commercial products from > vinegar concentrates (very syrupy) to spray-dried vinegar powder. This > latest exercise from Peter is reinventing the wheel to drive to the > beginning of reinventing yet another wheel. > > I mean home science projects are all well and good. I do my share of > them and I suspect you do as well. But I do ask a few questions first > and adjust my thinking based on facts obtained. > > Oh, well..Tis the season to be jolly and all. > > Pastorio > i am not trying to invent the wheeel--i am fully cognisant of vacumne distallation ( searched on ebay for a set up)--to much money freeze drying same problem but dialysis tubing yep got it but has to be boiuled in chelating solution to remove havy metals--not a good way collegen saussage casing AHHHA this might be the way!! stay tuned |
ilaboo wrote:
reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of surrounding air. wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled off will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented the wine from turning into vinegar stay tuned waiting for the dialysis tubing |
ilaboo wrote:
reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of surrounding air. wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled off will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented the wine from turning into vinegar stay tuned waiting for the dialysis tubing |
ilaboo wrote:
> reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light > syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly > delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of > surrounding air. > > wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled > off > > will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml > > in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few > hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented > the wine from turning into vinegar <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off the alcohol. There's plenty of good information out there about that whole question. You may go find it if you're interested. It wouldn't have prevented the change. Keeping acetobacters out of the wine would have, Look that up, too. Pastorio |
ilaboo wrote:
> reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light > syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly > delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of > surrounding air. > > wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled > off > > will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml > > in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few > hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented > the wine from turning into vinegar <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off the alcohol. There's plenty of good information out there about that whole question. You may go find it if you're interested. It wouldn't have prevented the change. Keeping acetobacters out of the wine would have, Look that up, too. Pastorio |
> > <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving > it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off > the alcohol. lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a "few hours" i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to come up with something simple i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very sensitive balance i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of holes--but lets see what happens anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001 milligrams? peter |
> > <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving > it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off > the alcohol. lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a "few hours" i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to come up with something simple i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very sensitive balance i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of holes--but lets see what happens anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001 milligrams? peter |
ilaboo wrote:
>> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving >> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive >> off the alcohol. > > lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a > "few hours" > > i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to > come up with something simple Hygrometer. Look it up. Hydrometer. Look that one up, too. > i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very > sensitive balance > > i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than > water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water Alcohol *alone* is more volatile. In solution, it will change. Physics 101. There's a technical name for the type of mixture alcohol and water make. When you know that and its definition, you'll begin to see the flaw in your assumption. Azeotrope. Look it up. Alcohol remaining preparation 100% Immediate consumption 70% Overnight storage 85% Boiling liquid, remove from heat 75% flamed baked or simmered: 40% 15 min. 35% 30min. 25% 1 hour 20% 1.5 hour 10% 2 hours 5% 2.5 hours (from Agricultural Research Service 1989) > i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few > hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity So the "experiment" has open and ill-defined parameters and guesses about the physical properties being examined. Just like the other one you heralded with great fanfare. Pastorio > cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol > (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of > holes--but lets see what happens > > anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001 > milligrams? > > peter |
ilaboo wrote:
>> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving >> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive >> off the alcohol. > > lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a > "few hours" > > i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to > come up with something simple Hygrometer. Look it up. Hydrometer. Look that one up, too. > i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very > sensitive balance > > i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than > water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water Alcohol *alone* is more volatile. In solution, it will change. Physics 101. There's a technical name for the type of mixture alcohol and water make. When you know that and its definition, you'll begin to see the flaw in your assumption. Azeotrope. Look it up. Alcohol remaining preparation 100% Immediate consumption 70% Overnight storage 85% Boiling liquid, remove from heat 75% flamed baked or simmered: 40% 15 min. 35% 30min. 25% 1 hour 20% 1.5 hour 10% 2 hours 5% 2.5 hours (from Agricultural Research Service 1989) > i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few > hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity So the "experiment" has open and ill-defined parameters and guesses about the physical properties being examined. Just like the other one you heralded with great fanfare. Pastorio > cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol > (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of > holes--but lets see what happens > > anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001 > milligrams? > > peter |
follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating
alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar about 1 cup very thick syruppy natudre i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and syruppy stay tuned to another follow up will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in fridge peter |
ilaboo wrote:
> follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating > > alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar If it's vinegar, it wasn't mold that grew in it. It was acetobacters. Pastorio > > about 1 cup > > very thick syruppy natudre > i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and > syruppy > > stay tuned to another follow up > > > will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to > drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in > fridge |
ilaboo wrote:
> follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating > > alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar If it's vinegar, it wasn't mold that grew in it. It was acetobacters. Pastorio > > about 1 cup > > very thick syruppy natudre > i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and > syruppy > > stay tuned to another follow up > > > will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to > drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in > fridge |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter