At what stage in the winemaking process is the right time to blend?
I've read inconsistent info. Intuitively, I think blending before
clarification makes sense. I.E. why not fine _after_ you get the
tastes right via blending instead of mixing two crystal clear wines
that might not be so clear after blending (depending on their
chemistry).

glad heart wrote:

> At what stage in the winemaking process is the right time to blend?
> I've read inconsistent info. Intuitively, I think blending before
> clarification makes sense. I.E. why not fine _after_ you get the
> tastes right via blending instead of mixing two crystal clear wines
> that might not be so clear after blending (depending on their
> chemistry).

Good question... myself I would blend wines after they were completely
finished (fined, filtered, whatever), simply because I think that after
they were finished I would have a better sense of what to aim for in the
final blend wihtout having to account for the changes that would occur
after fining the blended wine. However, I haven't done much blending
before, so I don't have much experience to think on, and they were reds
anyway, so fining wasn't needed on them.

--
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

"glad heart" > wrote:
> At what stage in the winemaking process is the right time to blend?
> I've read inconsistent info. Intuitively, I think blending before
> clarification makes sense. I.E. why not fine _after_ you get the
> tastes right via blending instead of mixing two crystal clear wines
> that might not be so clear after blending (depending on their
> chemistry).

I prefer to blend at bottling time.

On 11/3/03 10:46 AM, in article , "Negodki"
> wrote:

> "glad heart" > wrote:
>> At what stage in the winemaking process is the right time to blend?
>> I've read inconsistent info. Intuitively, I think blending before
>> clarification makes sense. I.E. why not fine _after_ you get the
>> tastes right via blending instead of mixing two crystal clear wines
>> that might not be so clear after blending (depending on their
>> chemistry).
>
> I prefer to blend at bottling time.
>
>

I would lean toward blending later in the process when I can get a better
idea of the taste, but I don't think I would do it at bottling for just the
reason pointed out in the original post. Sometimes, when blending wines, you
could end up with a change that could produce a haze. I would blend about a
month or so before bottling.

Negodki, would you elaborate on why you prefer to do it at bottling and, in
your experience, have you had problems with hazes developing in the bottle?


--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email)

"Greg Cook" > wrote:

> Negodki, would you elaborate on why you prefer to do it at bottling and,
in
> your experience, have you had problems with hazes developing in the
bottle?

I wait until each wine is finished, so that I know it's "final"
characteristic and flavor. Then I can decide whether or not I wish to try to
improve on that. If I'm happy with the wine as is, there is little reason to
blend. (The exception to this would be a Bordeaux style blend of Cabernets
and Merlot, where I'm trying to achieve ambrosia from three already
"perfect" wines).

Taste tests at this stage will help me decide the exact proportions I wish
to combine. Having done that, I have two options: to blend while racking, or
to blend while bottling. The procedure is the same in either case: Fill the
receiving container(s) to a predetermined level with the first [and second]
wine[s], and then top them up with the other. It's easier to blend while
racking (less containers, less careful measurements), but going directly to
the bottle saves a step. I have not (yet) had any problems with hazes
developing when the wines are combined, but perhaps that is because I am
dealing only with reds (and highly tannic apple wines) which have been bulk
aged a minimum of two years. If I ever end up with a haze in the bottle, I
will probably adopt your method.

I think the important thing, and I believe we agree on this, is not to blend
until the wine is finished. Some wines (especially reds) can be quite rough
until they age a few years, and then they smooth out almost magically. If
one were to blend to remove that roughness, they might also lose the complex
flavour characteristic that makes them so special.

"Charles H" > wrote in message
...
> I haven't done much blending
> before, so I don't have much experience to think on, and they were reds
> anyway, so fining wasn't needed on them.

Where did you get this notion? My experience tells me that red wines tend
to need _more_ fining than white wines - although both can benefit from
similar regimens.

Tom S

"Negodki" > wrote in message
...
> I think the important thing, and I believe we agree on this, is not to
blend
> until the wine is finished.

I'd agree with that also. After the blend is finalized and given some time
to "marry" is the time to polish the wine by fining.

Think of fining in terms of "liquid sandpaper".

Tom S

"Tom S" > wrote:

> Where did you get this notion? My experience tells me that red wines tend
> to need _more_ fining than white wines - although both can benefit from
> similar regimens.

I'd be interested in more details, Tom. It has been my experience that reds,
and apple wines fermented on the skins like reds, will (almost always) clear
by themselves with no need for the addition of "fining agents". Nor do they
(usually) require additives to treat excess astringency or other flavour
problems. What sort of "regimen" do you consider necessary/desirable for
reds (and why)?

I think it is especially important that blending is done for specific
reasons - to emulate traditional blends, balance a wine or just plain
experimentation.

Having said that, after purchasing a Riesling with very low pH, high TA
and fairly low Brix, I was fortunate to access a substantial quantity of
Geisenheim. This makes is an aromatic styled wine quite similar to
Riesling. The numbers on the Geisenhem were extremely complimentary
(Brix 25.5, pH 3.3) to the Riesling so I blended 2:1 early in the
Geisenhem fermentation and when the Riesling was almost well-fermented
and slowing (SG 1.020). I've had lost of experience with both varietals
and am confident in the result but, of course, only time will tell.
This blending was obviously out-of-necessity to balance the Riesling and
all the assay numbers of the blend are now safely in the ball-park.

I also agree that blending in most cases should be when the wine is
"finished" but I feel a notable exception to this is with established
blends such as the traditional blend of Cabernet Sauvignon with Merlot
(with or without a little Cab franc).

I typically ferment a 60:40 Cab Sauv/Merlot in my barrel then ferment
out an additional amount of each separately in glass, usually more
Merlot in reserve than Cab Sauv. I then top up the barrel according to
the development of the wine based on my tastes - usually with the
Merlot. Any remaining unblended wines can be bottled or blended with
next year's harvest.

Works well for me.

Glen Duff
----------------
Negodki wrote:

> "Greg Cook" > wrote:
>
>
>>Negodki, would you elaborate on why you prefer to do it at bottling and,
>>
> in
>
>>your experience, have you had problems with hazes developing in the
>>
> bottle?
>
> I wait until each wine is finished, so that I know it's "final"
> characteristic and flavor. Then I can decide whether or not I wish to try to
> improve on that. If I'm happy with the wine as is, there is little reason to
> blend. (The exception to this would be a Bordeaux style blend of Cabernets
> and Merlot, where I'm trying to achieve ambrosia from three already
> "perfect" wines).
>
> Taste tests at this stage will help me decide the exact proportions I wish
> to combine. Having done that, I have two options: to blend while racking, or
> to blend while bottling. The procedure is the same in either case: Fill the
> receiving container(s) to a predetermined level with the first [and second]
> wine[s], and then top them up with the other. It's easier to blend while
> racking (less containers, less careful measurements), but going directly to
> the bottle saves a step. I have not (yet) had any problems with hazes
> developing when the wines are combined, but perhaps that is because I am
> dealing only with reds (and highly tannic apple wines) which have been bulk
> aged a minimum of two years. If I ever end up with a haze in the bottle, I
> will probably adopt your method.
>
> I think the important thing, and I believe we agree on this, is not to blend
> until the wine is finished. Some wines (especially reds) can be quite rough
> until they age a few years, and then they smooth out almost magically. If
> one were to blend to remove that roughness, they might also lose the complex
> flavour characteristic that makes them so special.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Tom S wrote:

> Where did you get this notion? My experience tells me that red wines tend
> to need _more_ fining than white wines - although both can benefit from
> similar regimens.

I was only talking about fining for clarity, and all the reds I've done
have have cleared on their own, FWIW.

--
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

My experience only but all my reds clear in short order while whites can be
a problem. That goes for grape or country wines.

Ray

"Tom S" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Charles H" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I haven't done much blending
> > before, so I don't have much experience to think on, and they were reds
> > anyway, so fining wasn't needed on them.
>
> Where did you get this notion? My experience tells me that red wines tend
> to need _more_ fining than white wines - although both can benefit from
> similar regimens.
>
> Tom S
>
>

Ray wrote:

> My experience only but all my reds clear in short order while whites can be
> a problem. That goes for grape or country wines.

The more I'm learning about fining, the more I am a bit surprised...
originally I was lead to see fining as a means to make wine clear, but
finings seem to improve the taste of wine as well. Needless to say, this
year's reds will have fining trials done on them.

--
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

"Ray" > wrote in message
y.com...
> My experience only but all my reds clear in short order while whites can
be
> a problem. That goes for grape or country wines.
>
> Ray

Charles and Ray,
Many home winemakers believe fining is done to make wine clear. But, I
think Tom's point is that most wines are fined for purposes _other_ than
clarification.
lum

"Negodki" > wrote in message
...
> "Tom S" > wrote:
>
> > Where did you get this notion? My experience tells me that red wines
tend
> > to need _more_ fining than white wines - although both can benefit from
> > similar regimens.
>
> I'd be interested in more details, Tom. It has been my experience that
reds,
> and apple wines fermented on the skins like reds, will (almost always)
clear
> by themselves with no need for the addition of "fining agents". Nor do
they
> (usually) require additives to treat excess astringency or other flavour
> problems. What sort of "regimen" do you consider necessary/desirable for
> reds (and why)?

I always fine wines (both red and white) with bentonite - at least lightly.
It makes them heat stable, but this is a problem that many commercial
(especially "boutique") wineries ignore. Then their wines throw a protein
haze in the bottle, customers complain and the wine ends up on the bargain
shelf.

I also find that red wines usually benefit from a bit of gelatin fining to
"polish off the rough edges"; IOW, remove some of the harsh tannins and
expose the fruit behind them. This also is useful with barrel fermented
white wines, e.g. Chardonnay.

Tom S

That would make a real good thread on it's own if someone would start it. I
have no knowledge in the area and would appreciate comments. I have always
considered something done when essential for clearing but avoided because it
could adversely effect wine. Maybe I have been lead astray.

Ray

"Lum" > wrote in message
news
>
> "Ray" > wrote in message
> y.com...
> > My experience only but all my reds clear in short order while whites can
> be
> > a problem. That goes for grape or country wines.
> >
> > Ray
>
> Charles and Ray,
> Many home winemakers believe fining is done to make wine clear. But, I
> think Tom's point is that most wines are fined for purposes _other_ than
> clarification.
> lum
>
>
>

>I always fine wines (both red and white) with bentonite - at least lightly.

Just to clarify (sorry ;-) ), is your 1lb/1000 gallon figure a what
you consider "lightly" fining?

"Art Schubert" <na> wrote in message
news
> >I always fine wines (both red and white) with bentonite - at least
lightly.
>
> Just to clarify (sorry ;-) ), is your 1lb/1000 gallon figure a what
> you consider "lightly" fining?

Yes. I consider anything up to and including ~3lb/1000 gal "light" for
bentonite.

Tom S