Well, I picked up my baco noir on saturday, about 322 liters worth of
crushed grapes. They are fermenting in two large plastic drums right
now. I punch the cap down at least twice day, trying not to go more than
8 hours between punchings. I've used BM45 and will be adding some more
nutrients to the must tonight to stave off chances of H2S.

I am concerned with the numbers a bit, since it was a bad year down in
Niagara, they a Brix: 20.2, pH: 3.22, acid: 14.2.

I suppose acid reduction is in order... I have malo bacteria, I plan on
innoculating when I press. I'm not sure if this is going to be
sufficient or not however. I also plan on chapitalizing, and I've read
conflicting information as when it's best to do this, either now or when
the must gets down to 1 or 2 degrees brix.

Other than that, I must say it the grapes did taste decent and all. I
have a 225 litre barrel that I will be filling with this as well. I am a
bit nervous as this is the first time I've done such a large quantity
before.

"Charles H" > wrote:

> I am concerned with the numbers a bit, since it was a bad year down in
> Niagara, they a Brix: 20.2, pH: 3.22, acid: 14.2.
>
> I suppose acid reduction is in order... I have malo bacteria, I plan on
> innoculating when I press. I'm not sure if this is going to be
> sufficient or not however. I also plan on chapitalizing, and I've read
> conflicting information as when it's best to do this, either now or when
> the must gets down to 1 or 2 degrees brix.

Charles,

I hope you mean acid 1.42, not 14.2?

You may have to use a combination of methods to get the acid down. It's my
understanding that most grapes normally have about 50% tartaric, 25% malic,
and 25% citric. Malolactic fermentation will convert the malic into lactic,
resulting in a halving of the acidity attributable to malic. So, unless the
malic is abnormally high, the best you can expect from malolactic
fermentation would be a reduction of 1.42 x .25 x .5 = .18, whereas you
probably want a reduction of .67 (to get the acid level down to about .75).

If you have the means of testing the malic acid content, you will have a
better idea of what to expect from MLF.

Various means of acid reduction, and heated arguments over their pros and
cons, were recently discussed in the following thread:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...fts.winemaking

The chapitalization will reduce the acid somewhat, since it will increase
the must volume by ~ .645 its weight in grams. Therefore, acid measurement
and adjustment should be done afterwards, not before.

Good luck.

Negodki wrote:

> I hope you mean acid 1.42, not 14.2?

Well, the sheet that came with the grapes has 14.2 as the number under
the acid column... I was thinking it was 14.2ppt? However, 1.42 makes
more sense.

"Charles H" > wrote:

> Well, the sheet that came with the grapes has 14.2 as the number under
> the acid column... I was thinking it was 14.2ppt? However, 1.42 makes
> more sense.

You may want to try to verify this with your own test before doing any
adjustments.

The only place I've seen ppt measurements (and that has been very recently)
it was showing the value in terms of sulfuric acid, which I'm told is the
French convention. [The convention I'm familiar with is percentage in terms
of tartaric.] If this is the case (and it may well be if the grapes came
from Quebec), you need to convert to tartaric as a reference for most of the
discussions in this newsgroup to make much sense.

I believe the ratio between sulfuric and tartaric is 1.5, thus:

14.2 ppt sulfuric = 1.42% sulfuric / 1.5 = 0.95 tartaric, which is a more
reasonable figure for ripe grapes.

I'm not sure of this formula, however, because I'm not sure whether
parts-per-thousand is a weight per volume figure, a volume per volume
figure, or something on the molecular level. So I may be mixing apples with
oranges.

Regardless, it is always best to run your own tests, rather than rely on
vineyard or retailers figures. They may be in error for any number of
reasons.

> I hope you mean acid 1.42, not 14.2?

Many growers/winemakers express TA in grams per liter.



clyde

Clyde Gill wrote:

> > I hope you mean acid 1.42, not 14.2?
>
> Many growers/winemakers express TA in grams per liter.

Either way, my must is pretty acidic... I am going to run a test on it
when I get home.

Charles,
Make sure you drive off the CO2 from your sample by stirring or shaking
it vigorously until it contains no more pressure. I wont claim to know much
about the wine you are making, but if it was me and the numbers are
confirmed to be as high as you think then I would make an acid reduction
now. I would also add the sugar now rather than let the ferment slow down
before adding it. This will help to keep the ferment strong and the must
protected by CO2. I dont think the other method of sugar addition is
necessarily incorrect though. I am of the opinion that the sooner you make
your adjustments to Acidity the better the wine is likely to turn out. I
will also add that excessive reductions by means of Calcium Carbonate or
similar can and in my experience has led to off tastes. I have heard the
term chalky used to describe it, but in my wine that I did a heavy reduction
on it seemed to take some of the taste with it. Just a cautionary note based
only on my experience. HTH
John Dixon
"Charles H" > wrote in message
...
> Clyde Gill wrote:
>
> > > I hope you mean acid 1.42, not 14.2?
> >
> > Many growers/winemakers express TA in grams per liter.
>
> Either way, my must is pretty acidic... I am going to run a test on it
> when I get home.
>

Charles H wrote "I picked up my baco noir on saturday, about 322 liters
worth of
> crushed grapes. They are fermenting in two large plastic drums right
> now....I've used BM45. I am concerned with the numbers a bit, since it
was a bad year down in
> Niagara, they a Brix: 20.2, pH: 3.22, acid: 14.2."

Charles - I've grown and made wine out of Baco for about 5 years. High acid
is always the problem with the Baco grown here in the KC area. I think this
is normal for Baco regardless of where they are grown. I agree with Clyde
that the 14.2 acid value is 14.2 grams acid per 1000 ml of juice. Same as
1.42% TA. Anyway, this is pretty high acid. I once discussed this with the
people at Presque Isle and they said their Baco is over 2%TA some years.

"I suppose acid reduction is in order... I have malo bacteria, I plan on
> innoculating when I press."
If it were me, before I added anything to lower TA, I would take a sample of
the juice and freeze it overnight. Thaw and test again for TA. This will
give you a good idea of what the finished TA will be after fermentation and
cold conditioning. Depending on how much acid ppt from solution during the
freeze-thaw you can decide how to proceed.

I've used potassium bicarbonate to lower Baco TA in the past. I did this to
new wine after all fermentation was complete. In the 1998 Baco wine the TA
fell from 1.06%TA to 0.62%TA with K bicarb. Please use caution when adding
K bicarb. It may just be my taster but I believe it results in wine with a
salty taste. This taste dissipates with time.

If the TA does not fall significantly during the freeze-thaw you will need
to reduce acid chemically. I noticed a good idea the other day on this
forum. I forget who suggested it but the idea is to totally remove all acid
from a fraction of the wine with calcium carbonate. Then remix the two
fractions together which will result in the desired %TA for all of the wine.
Check out so-called double salt acid reduction technique.

One final thing...you have a lot of wine to work with. It would be
interesting to split the wine into two sub-batches. Ferment one batch with
no manipulations to adjust TA. For the other batch use either potassium
bicarb. or the double salt method (preferred since the TA is so high) to
adjust TA. Use ML culture on both and give each a hard cold treatment this
winter. See how they turn out.

Good luck with your Baco. Report back with some results...I'm always
seeking information about how to make good Baco wine.

Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

"William Frazier" > wrote:

> I agree with Clyde that the 14.2 acid value is 14.2 grams acid per 1000 ml
of juice. Same as 1.42% TA.

I've been going crazy (short trip that it is) trying to figure out why 14.2
grams per liter (1000 ml) is 1.42% TA, or more precisely what the percentage
actually represents. I finally did so, and thought I would share it with the
group, in case someone else is still scratching their head and tearing their
hair out.

The "% TA" value designates "grams per milliliter (expressed as a
percentage)".

So, grams per liter (expressed as a fraction) divided by 1000 = grams per
milliliter (expressed as a fraction), and grams per milliliter (expressed as
a fraction) x 100 = grams per milliliter (expressed as a percentage)!

Since 1/1000 x 100 = 1/10, we can convert grams per liter to % TA by
dividing by 10.

I hope this wasn't obvious to everyone but me.

William Frazier wrote:

> Good luck with your Baco. Report back with some results...I'm always
> seeking information about how to make good Baco wine.

Thank you very much for your advice.

I think I will try the double-salt method on half the wine and see how
that works out. Due to the rapidly approaching winter here, I think cold
stabilization won't be too much of a hassle, the temperature outside is
hovering around 0c right now.

Negodki wrote "I've been going crazy (short trip that it is) trying to
figure out why 14.2
> grams per liter (1000 ml) is 1.42% TA, or more precisely what the
percentage
> actually represents...The "% TA" value designates "grams per milliliter
(expressed as a
> percentage)"...So, grams per liter (expressed as a fraction) divided by
1000 = grams per
> milliliter (expressed as a fraction), and grams per milliliter (expressed
as
> a fraction) x 100 = grams per milliliter (expressed as a percentage)!"

You're making this harder than necessary. 14.2 grams/1000 ml is the same as
1.42 grams/100 ml. Just move the decimal over one space. The %TA value is
just what it says....the percent of titratable acid. So, 1.42 grams/100 ml
it the same as 1.42%TA.

For the Baco example 1.42%TA is very high acid. Quite a few posters on
r.c.w. like their red wines in the 0.60 to 0.65%TA range. I agree, this
amount of acid makes very nice tasting red wine. For the Baco example you
would have to reduce the acid by at least half so it's probably not possible
to use potassium bicarbonate alone to do the trick. I use ion exchange when
I need to take out this amount of acid but not everyone has access to this
technique in their cellar. Several have posted, in the past, that
"double-salt" technique can accomplish the same acid reduction. I've never
tried it myself but I know members of my wine club that have done so. I
understand that the double-salt technique requires special attention to
intense or rapid mixing when the process takes place. Seems like a
combination of "double-salt" acid reduction followed by malo-lactic
fermentation and hard cold conditioning will result in a pretty good Baco
wine.

Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

>
> I hope this wasn't obvious to everyone but me.
>
>

Even if this were true, don't sweat it. We all have our moments of grandeur
and our moments of gliches. That's one of the powers of a group like this
to air out our gliches.

I watched part of a movie last night (kT was watching it), "As Good as it
Gets", when the line was thrown at the Jack Nicholson character, "Your best
quality is your willingness to humiliate yourself" or something to that
effect. Hit real close to home for me, and explains a lot about being a
winery owner!

clyde

J Dixon wrote:

> I would also add the sugar now rather than let the ferment slow down
> before adding it.

I was wondering how to account for all the grape skins in calculating
the amount of sugar to add.

--
charles

"Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
- W.C. Fields

"Charles H" > wrote:

> I was wondering how to account for all the grape skins in calculating
> the amount of sugar to add.

Since this varies by the size of the grape, and the number of stems and
leaves, and such, trial and error (and experience) is the only reliable
method.

Peter Brehm (sp?) Vineyards used to publish a table showing the average
percentage for each of the varietals they sell, but I was unable to find it
on the Internet this crush season. If anyone has a copy or a current link,
please post it.

I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes (e.g.
"table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this year,
but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
correct figure.

Another, more accurate, method might be to weigh the empty container, then
weigh the full one, then compute the liquid volume based on its specific
gravity. But I have no intention of going to such trouble. Wine is very
forgiving, and a 5-10% difference in volumetric based additions is not going
to mean the end of the world.

Besides, a typical set of measuring-spoons or scales have as great an error.

"Negodki" > wrote:

> I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes
(e.g.
> "table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
> Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this year,
> but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
> correct figure.

I should add that I destem 100%. If you only destem to 80 or 90 %, the
percentage of solids will be somewhat higher.

With apples (which I ferment on the skins for about 3 weeks), I just go by
the height of the must in the container (without subtracting a percentage
for solids). I "likes me cider" strong, acidic, and tannic, so I'd rather go
"too high" than too low.

Negodki wrote:

> I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes (e.g.
> "table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
> Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this year,
> but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
> correct figure.

Thanks that seems to make sense... my baco grapes certainly aren't as
large as table grapes. I think I shall go about figuring it out this
evening.

--
charles

"Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
- W.C. Fields

Perhaps Bill Frazier can give you a more accurate percentage for Baco's.
What are they like? I've never seen or tasted any before.

"Charles H" > wrote
> Negodki wrote:
>
> > I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes
(e.g.
> > "table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
> > Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this
year,
> > but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
> > correct figure.

> Thanks that seems to make sense... my baco grapes certainly aren't as
> large as table grapes. I think I shall go about figuring it out this
> evening.

Charles wrote "I was wondering how to account for all the grape skins in
calculating
> the amount of sugar to add."

Charles - Here's some historical data for Baco.

1999, harvest 200# grapes, foot crush and destem
yield 19.33 gallons must containing 12.5 gallons juice
juice was 64.7% of the whole must

2000, harvest 202# grapes, foot crush and destem
yield 20.0 gallons must containing 13.0 gallons juice
juice was 65% of the whole must

2001, harvest 168.5# grapes, foot crush and destem
didn't get a volume value for the whole must
got 12.625 gallons juice after a hard press

So, it looks like you need about 15.8 pounds of grapes
for each gallon of must. And, at least out here in Kansas,
you need 1.5 gallons must for each gallon of juice after
settling and pressing. Keep in mind that my wife crushed the grapes
by foot in the years mentioned above. Then the stems were removed
by working the crushed mixture through a 2-mesh screen.
This may have resulted in a lot more particulate
mater in the must than you would get if the grapes were more
gently crushed with a crusher/destemmer machine.

I now use a machine to crush but still remove stems with
the 2-mesh screen and I always use the ratio of 2 parts
juice per 3 parts must after destemming.

Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

"William Frazier" > wrote:

> ...by working the crushed mixture through a 2-mesh screen.

What's a 2-mesh screen? Is that like 2" poultry netting (chicken wire)?

Got in on the last of this thread but wanted to add 2 cents a bit.

Went over to Bill's and got some of his Baco Noir couple years back. He
allowed me to taste some of his, showed me his numbers and all. As stated
they where a bit high. Now the difference came when I got them home. I could
not press them, all my containers where full. So I had no choice but to
freeze them all. After I think it was 6 months thereabout I pressed them
partially frozen. Once thawed took my readings. E-mailed Bill the findings
Where VERY different than his. AM unsure but think he told me that batch of
his was not as good as expected. However mine has and still is getting
wonderful reviews.

Since that time on some things that I have picked that are high acid whether
fruit or grape I have frozen them 1st, 2 examples this year was my
Gooseberries and Traminette's little high, froze 1/2 and pressed 1/2 at
picking. Frozen bunch had much better readings after thawed and are at this
stage better in taste and color.

Not a Chemist or Science major, un-sure of all the why's yet, just own
experience... More experiments req'd....


Ben & Linda McCune
HoneyCreek Vineyard/Orchards
http://honeycreek.us


"Charles H" > wrote in message
...
> Negodki wrote:
>
> > I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes
(e.g.
> > "table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
> > Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this
year,
> > but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
> > correct figure.
>
> Thanks that seems to make sense... my baco grapes certainly aren't as
> large as table grapes. I think I shall go about figuring it out this
> evening.
>
> --
> charles
>
> "Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
> forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
> - W.C. Fields

Negodki wrote "What's a 2-mesh screen? Is that like 2" poultry netting
(chicken wire)?"

Two holes per linear inch. I use stainless steel screen.

Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

"William Frazier" > wrote:

> Two holes per linear inch. I use stainless steel screen.

Aha! (They call that 1/2" mesh around here). Where do you obtain stainless
steel screen? I searched the Internet, and the only place I could find was
in Asia. The prices were good, but the shipping was a bit steep.

Negodki wrote "Where do you obtain stainless
> steel screen? "

McNichols Co.
www.mcnichols.com

Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

Opps, meant Leon's not Baco. Thanks Bill for some reason I am always
confusing this.......


"Ben McCune" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Got in on the last of this thread but wanted to add 2 cents a bit.
>
> Went over to Bill's and got some of his Baco Noir couple years back. He
> allowed me to taste some of his, showed me his numbers and all. As stated
> they where a bit high. Now the difference came when I got them home. I
could
> not press them, all my containers where full. So I had no choice but to
> freeze them all. After I think it was 6 months thereabout I pressed them
> partially frozen. Once thawed took my readings. E-mailed Bill the findings
> Where VERY different than his. AM unsure but think he told me that batch
of
> his was not as good as expected. However mine has and still is getting
> wonderful reviews.
>
> Since that time on some things that I have picked that are high acid
whether
> fruit or grape I have frozen them 1st, 2 examples this year was my
> Gooseberries and Traminette's little high, froze 1/2 and pressed 1/2 at
> picking. Frozen bunch had much better readings after thawed and are at
this
> stage better in taste and color.
>
> Not a Chemist or Science major, un-sure of all the why's yet, just own
> experience... More experiments req'd....
>
>
> Ben & Linda McCune
> HoneyCreek Vineyard/Orchards
> http://honeycreek.us
>
>
> "Charles H" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Negodki wrote:
> >
> > > I measure the must volume, and then reduce it by 15% for large grapes
> (e.g.
> > > "table" grapes) and 18% for smaller grapes (e.g. Sangiovese, Merlot,
> > > Cabernet). 20% would have been a better figure for the cabernet this
> year,
> > > but I didn't find out until the pressing. And last year, 18% _was_ the
> > > correct figure.
> >
> > Thanks that seems to make sense... my baco grapes certainly aren't as
> > large as table grapes. I think I shall go about figuring it out this
> > evening.
> >
> > --
> > charles
> >
> > "Once ... in the wilds of Afghanistan, I lost my corkscrew, and we were
> > forced to live on nothing but food and water for days."
> > - W.C. Fields
>
>