Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Winemaking (rec.crafts.winemaking) Discussion of the process, recipes, tips, techniques and general exchange of lore on the process, methods and history of wine making. Includes traditional grape wines, sparkling wines & champagnes. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For the only the second time I have had a batch of wine that was stabilized,
(sorbate and SO2) that had renewed fermentation in the bottle. Both wines were sweetend at bottling based on wife tests. Both were crystal clear had thrown no sediment in months. One was a Brew King kit (no F Pack, sweetend on my own as the wife thought it was too dry for here tastes) the other from Grapes. The Pinot Gris ended up a great sparkler! But I am getting tired of this. I suspect viable yeast were still in the wine, even though the sorbate would stop reproduction they would still put off CO2. Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle step? Tom |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tom,
One of my thoughts would be- how fresh is your Sorbate? After about 6 months it is a good idea to toss it out. This problem can be compounded if it has been sitting around the wine shop for a while before you get it. Also are you using the recommended amount of Sorbate, or what comes in the kit? As far as the filtering- it presents a whole new group of problems as most home environments are not "sterile" as far as yeast floating about. I have used filtering and no Sorbate with a great deal of success, but the expense of a good setup is not usually justifiable unless you are making a fair amount of wine. "Tom" > wrote in message ... > For the only the second time I have had a batch of wine that was stabilized, > (sorbate and SO2) that had renewed fermentation in the bottle. Both wines > were sweetend at bottling based on wife tests. Both were crystal clear had > thrown no sediment in months. One was a Brew King kit (no F Pack, sweetend > on my own as the wife thought it was too dry for here tastes) the other from > Grapes. The Pinot Gris ended up a great sparkler! But I am getting tired > of this. I suspect viable yeast were still in the wine, even though the > sorbate would stop reproduction they would still put off CO2. > > Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter > system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a > wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle > step? > > Tom > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the comments,
I will replace my sorbate before its used again. With the kit I used the pre-measured dose as provided. I will have to check my notes on the Gewurtz as that was from grapes and I would have measured that one myself. I make a fair amount of wine. In kits, grapes and a few country wines. Built a wine closet that holds 600 bottles. Most of which are mine. More grapes then kits now days. Tom "J Dixon" > wrote in message t... > Tom, > One of my thoughts would be- how fresh is your Sorbate? After about 6 > months it is a good idea to toss it out. This problem can be compounded if > it has been sitting around the wine shop for a while before you get it. Also > are you using the recommended amount of Sorbate, or what comes in the kit? > As far as the filtering- it presents a whole new group of problems as > most home environments are not "sterile" as far as yeast floating about. I > have used filtering and no Sorbate with a great deal of success, but the > expense of a good setup is not usually justifiable unless you are making a > fair amount of wine. > "Tom" > wrote in message > ... > > For the only the second time I have had a batch of wine that was > stabilized, > > (sorbate and SO2) that had renewed fermentation in the bottle. Both wines > > were sweetend at bottling based on wife tests. Both were crystal clear > had > > thrown no sediment in months. One was a Brew King kit (no F Pack, > sweetend > > on my own as the wife thought it was too dry for here tastes) the other > from > > Grapes. The Pinot Gris ended up a great sparkler! But I am getting tired > > of this. I suspect viable yeast were still in the wine, even though the > > sorbate would stop reproduction they would still put off CO2. > > > > Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter > > system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a > > wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle > > step? > > > > Tom > > > > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Tom" > wrote in message ... > Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter > system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a > wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle > step? Make that "sweeten, filter and bottle", and yes, you can do it as a continuous process. I've done sterile filtrations at home for years, when necessary. It's not as hard as it sounds. It's not as cheap as sorbate/sulfite, but I don't like the taste of sorbate. Membrane filter cartridgess are expensive, but if you take care to clean the wine up well and run it through a prefilter stage the membrane can be reused many times. BTW, I'd recommend arresting the fermentation before dryness by chilling to stop the fermentation before dryness when the wine tastes right, bentoniting, settling well, and sterile filtering - as opposed to fermenting to dryness and adding back sussreserve or a dosage of sweetener. That's the way the best sweet wines are produced commercially. Tom S |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tom:
I'm curious: for those of who can't or don't do sterile filtering (possible stripping of taste?) what if one uses a yeast that stops at 12%-ish (Cote des Blancs) and starts with enough sugar to make the P.A. higher than that. Will in-bottle ferment be prevented without sorbate or filtering because the yeast is incapable of functioning, even if some yeast cells remain? Art S On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:48:21 GMT, "Tom S" > wrote: <snip> >BTW, I'd recommend arresting the fermentation before dryness by chilling to >stop the fermentation before dryness when the wine tastes right, >bentoniting, settling well, and sterile filtering - as opposed to fermenting >to dryness and adding back sussreserve or a dosage of sweetener. That's the >way the best sweet wines are produced commercially. > >Tom S > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Art Schubert" <na> wrote in message ... > Tom: > > I'm curious: for those of who can't or don't do sterile filtering > (possible stripping of taste?) what if one uses a yeast that stops at > 12%-ish (Cote des Blancs) and starts with enough sugar to make the > P.A. higher than that. Will in-bottle ferment be prevented without > sorbate or filtering because the yeast is incapable of functioning, > even if some yeast cells remain? > > Art S Art, You may be interested in the following article by Steve Roberta. lum ************************************** STERILE FILTRATION-SCIENCE VS MYTH by Steve Roberta Department of Viticulture & Enology University of California, Davis September 1994 The question of whether sterile filtration harms wine flavor evokes much debate and emotion. Although there is little scientific research on the question, filtration proponents rightly emphasize the financial risks incurred by producers who choose not to filter. These risks are real. Filtration proponents point out that wine flavor components are smaller than the pore size of the sterile filter membrane, and that insoluble filtrate doesn't possess significant flavor, anyway. Thus, proponents argue that there is no reason why filtration, properly performed, should affect wine flavor. In the other camp are filtration opponents who believe they do taste a difference. They claim filtration strips wine of significant properties and flavors. However, one is hard pressed to obtain from opponents just what these properties and flavors are supposed to be. Nevertheless, they observe filtrate being removed from a wine and associate filtration with the taste difference they perceive. Thus, they conclude filtration is detrimental to wine flavor. Encouraged by our professors to decide for ourselves who is right, we recently conducted an experiment which asked the question, "does sterile filtration create changes in wine that consumers can taste?" From a supermarket shelf we selected five well-known, unfiltered Zinfandel, Pinot Noir, and Cabernet Sauvignon - vintage 1990 to 1992; and from the UC Davis cellar, one unfiltered Pinot Noir - vintage 1984. Four bottles of each wine were combined under nitrogen to eliminate bottle variation; half of the wine was sterile filtered, the other half was not filtered but was similarly processed. Over five evenings our trained taste panel, consisting of 12 volunteer judges (none of whom were connected with the department of enology and viticulture at UC Davis) evaluated the wines by duo-trio testing. Two repetitions of each flight of each wine resulted in a mean correct response of 54%. The best correct response of any one panelist was 66.6%. There was no variance by wine, flight or panelist. In other words,...................the panelists could do no better than random guessing. We thus conclude that the panelists could not detect a difference between filtered and unfiltered red wines, and from this can infer that there was no detectable difference in wine flavor as a result of the filtration. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sounds definitive. Thanks. I'll file it away for reference.
I'm still curious about whether a yeast with modest alcohol tolerance can possibly do any damage if bottled at or near its alcohol limit with residual sugar but without filtration. a. On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:57:19 GMT, "Lum" > wrote: >STERILE FILTRATION-SCIENCE VS MYTH <snip> |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alcohol tolerance for a yeast is an average, not a tolerance. In general
the yeast will quit at about a given point. But there could be (likely to be) yeast in the batch that have a higher tolerance than the average. There could even be some that quit at about the tolerance and then wake up hungry later. There are millions or even billions of yeast in a ferment and some of them will be radicals. Also, yeast are not very bright. They don't always understand how they are suppose to behave. You could even get a whole generation that are lazy and quit early. Use the tolerance as a guide but not as a target. ;o) Ray "Art Schubert" <na> wrote in message ... > Sounds definitive. Thanks. I'll file it away for reference. > > I'm still curious about whether a yeast with modest alcohol tolerance > can possibly do any damage if bottled at or near its alcohol limit > with residual sugar but without filtration. > > a. > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:57:19 GMT, "Lum" > > wrote: > > >STERILE FILTRATION-SCIENCE VS MYTH > > <snip> |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Art Schubert" <na> wrote in message ... > Sounds definitive. Thanks. I'll file it away for reference. > > I'm still curious about whether a yeast with modest alcohol tolerance > can possibly do any damage if bottled at or near its alcohol limit > with residual sugar but without filtration. > Another point of view. Get a copy of C.J.J. Berry's book. You will find that he made *lots* of sweet wines and used neither chemical stabilizers (ie Sorbate) nor sterile filtration. (yes they were stabile in the bottle) For many years his writings were considered definitive by those who made "country" wines. Hard to argue with success. He did so by running the ferments until the yeast reached it's AT (Alcohol Toxicity point). The alcohol then acts as a poison and kills the yeast leaving any remaining sugars as "residual". In fact, until the advent of chemical stabilizers and sterile filtration, this was the most commonly used method of producing sweet wines. (Fortifying to raise the alcohol level above the AT was the other "common" method) It worked then and it still does. I routinely make several of these "old fashioned" (residual sugar) ferments each year. And, if you go to Jack's site you will find that many of the "old" recipes there are designed to be this kind of ferment. Of course, you must always be on guard for anything "strange" that may get into your wine and be prepared to deal with it. But this is no different than any other wine. Let me add a copy of a previous post which you may find helpful: <copy>............................................ .......................... ................. "Jeff Griffith" > wrote in message ... > With regard to method #1: > > I've been reading in other postings that the yeast dies off when the alcohol level > reaches a certain point (about 12% or so?). If the juice starts out naturally very sweet > (no sweeteners added!), is it possible that the yeast will die without fermenting all > of the sugar to alcohol? Will other factors reduce the residual level further? > > Thanks, > Jeff Griffith Jeff When (or if) a ferment will "end" (die off) depends on which yeast strain is used and how much sugar is in the must. It is really quite simple to determine this when planning a ferment. First, go to: http://winemakermag.com/referencegui...tstrainschart/ Print this if you can. Note the "Alcohol Tolerance" (AT) column. This tells you how high each type of yeast can go. Second, Get a decent (full range) Sugar/SG chart with a PA column. Third, (example) Take an SG reading of the must. Look at the PA column on the SG/Sugar chart for that reading. Next, compare the PA to the AT of the yeast you have elected to use. If the PA is *less* than the AT, you will end up with a dry wine with alcohol equal to that PA. BUT - if the PA is *greater* than the AT, the ferment will "end" (die off) with alcohol equal to the AT and there will be "residual" sugar left in the wine. Just how much sugar will remain can be determined by locating the AT *number* in the PA column of the SG/Sugar chart. The *difference* between this number and the PA of the must will tell you how much sugar will remain. Of course, there are a myriad of variables, but this method will give you very good "working" estimates for planning your ferments. This is especially important when doing "old fashioned" (residual sugar) ferments because it allows you to balance residual sugar levels against the somewhat elevated alcohol levels encountered when doing such ferments. HTH FWIW - If you are going to do "old" recipes, you will be best served by selecting yeasts with ATs in the 13-14% range. <end copy>............................................. .......................... .............. HTMS |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here are some suggestions you can use or not as they fit your style.
It is possible you are accidentally stirring up yeast sediment on the bottom of the carboy by pushing the wand all the way down and then accidentally moving it around on the bottom. Try racking with the wand only part way down and then pushing it deeper as necessary until it is an inch or so from the bottom. Then move the last bit of wine to a 1 or a 1/2 gal carboy to settle again. When I sweeten I never bottle. Put it back in a carboy to set for another 2-3 weeks to see if there is any sign of fermentation before bottling. I always do this but I have never had this problem. Ray "Tom" > wrote in message ... > For the only the second time I have had a batch of wine that was stabilized, > (sorbate and SO2) that had renewed fermentation in the bottle. Both wines > were sweetend at bottling based on wife tests. Both were crystal clear had > thrown no sediment in months. One was a Brew King kit (no F Pack, sweetend > on my own as the wife thought it was too dry for here tastes) the other from > Grapes. The Pinot Gris ended up a great sparkler! But I am getting tired > of this. I suspect viable yeast were still in the wine, even though the > sorbate would stop reproduction they would still put off CO2. > > Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter > system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a > wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle > step? > > Tom > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tom, I think John probably had it right when he suggested your sorbate
might be old. Six to eight months after the jar is opened is about max shelf life for potassium sorbate. Most people don't buy sorbate in a jar, but rather buy a 1 or 2-ounce supply in a little ZipLoc bag. The shop owner bought it in a jar and opened it to fill those little bags. You have no idea when he did that because he didn't (and won't) date the bag. It might be four months old when you bought it. I buy my sorbate in jars. The smallest amount I can buy in a jar is 55 grams. I buy 4-6 jars at a time. I never open one unless I have several carboys and several gallon jugs of wine to treat--the reason should be obvious. I date the jar when I break the seal and I throw it out 3/4 full six months later. If I don't do this, I won't be stabilizing my wine. I've tried using more to make up for the deterioration, but there is a level at which you can taste it and, like Tom S., I don't care for the taste. By the way, how old is your potassium metabisulfite? It too has a shelf life--about a year. Campden is the same. If you don't have a spare refrigerator for cold stabilizing your wines, think about getting one. Tom S. is right on that account. Finally, Lum, Roberta's article is a classic and ought to be published at least here at least every six months. Please feel free to do it whenever appropriate. That's one broken record I can suffer through for the benefit of those just joining us. I'm off for to California for the next 3 1/2 weeks. I'll tune in again in mid-January. Hope you all have personally rewarding holidays.... Jack Keller, The Winemaking Home Page http://winemaking.jackkeller.net/ |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JEP" > wrote in message om... > (Jack Keller) wrote in message . com>... > >> > > Finally, Lum, Roberta's article is a classic and ought to be published > > at least here at least every six months. Please feel free to do it > > whenever appropriate. That's one broken record I can suffer through > > for the benefit of those just joining us. > > > > Sorry Jack and Lum, > > But, I don't think that study proves anything. It does not take into > account aging unfiltered vs aging filtered. Don't get me wrong, I'm > not promoting unfiltered wines, nor promoting filtering, I think each > has it's place depending on wine style, but that study is just plain > flawed. It doesn't match what would happen to a wine based on the > decision to filter or not. > > If I take a bottle of '82 Lafite and filter half of it now, no, I > wouldn't expect to taste a difference between the filtered and > unfiltered wine, but would the wine be the same if the wine maker had > decided to filter it 20 years ago? > > The world may never know. > > Andy Andy, I agree that an experiment such as this can't address what will happen to filtered wine in 20 years. But, it seems to me that Roberta's experiment does prove that a tight filtration did not significantly change the near term characteristics of _those_ particular wines. Perhaps the most important aspect is that an experiment was done. Measurements were made, data was collected and analyzed and the results presented. That's a lot different than speculation. Regards, lum |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Lum" > wrote in message >...
> > I agree that an experiment such as this can't address what will happen to > filtered wine in 20 years. But, it seems to me that Roberta's experiment > does prove that a tight filtration did not significantly change the near > term characteristics of _those_ particular wines. I agree. > Perhaps the most > important aspect is that an experiment was done. I agree 100%. > Measurements were made, > data was collected and analyzed and the results presented. That's a lot > different than speculation. And we need a lot more of this. Sorry, I may have come off too strong before. It's just that sometimes we (as a society) try to read too much into some of these studies. This includes current medical research. Sometimes we want the data to prove something that the experiment just didn't address. Unfortunately, a lot of the experiments we really need, take 5, 10, 20 years to conduct. If the experiment isn't set up right to begin with, a lot of time can be wasted. > > Regards, My Regards also, Andy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think that from a commercial standpoint filtration to assure to a
high degree that your wine will be biologically stable is becoming nearly an industry standard. Of course there are the "all natural" methods which I recognize, but they are the exception for now. I have attended a seminar on filtration in which the same wine was sampled as filtered and non filtered. Clarity in this case was not disernable to me, and I certainly could not tell which was which although in my mind I did perceive the wines to taste slightly different. This view seemed to be the general consensus of those in attendance with obvious differing opinions. Some guessed which was filtered and which non, and as Lum stated earlier- guessing was about the best that could be done. So for me IF I was a COMMERCIAL winemaker, I would sterile filter all of my white wines both dry and semi-sweet, and might consider the same treatment for my reds although I am not convinced on them. For the home winemaker- I dont think it is necessary, but at times I find it desireable mainly to give my wine a "polished" look, and to avoid the use of Sorbate which I am not a big fan of taste wise. On the subject of Sorbate I will add that in lesser amounts I cant detect it, and I imagine most people cant either, so that is a debateable issue as well. Just my opinion based on what I have experienced and have learned. HTH John Dixon "JEP" > wrote in message om... > "Lum" > wrote in message >... > > > > I agree that an experiment such as this can't address what will happen to > > filtered wine in 20 years. But, it seems to me that Roberta's experiment > > does prove that a tight filtration did not significantly change the near > > term characteristics of _those_ particular wines. > > I agree. > > > Perhaps the most > > important aspect is that an experiment was done. > > I agree 100%. > > > Measurements were made, > > data was collected and analyzed and the results presented. That's a lot > > different than speculation. > > And we need a lot more of this. Sorry, I may have come off too strong > before. > > It's just that sometimes we (as a society) try to read too much into > some of these studies. This includes current medical research. > Sometimes we want the data to prove something that the experiment just > didn't address. > > Unfortunately, a lot of the experiments we really need, take 5, 10, 20 > years to conduct. If the experiment isn't set up right to begin with, > a lot of time can be wasted. > > > > > Regards, > > My Regards also, > > Andy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
> "Lum" > wrote in message
>... > > > > I agree that an experiment such as this can't address what will happen to > > filtered wine in 20 years. But, it seems to me that Roberta's experiment > > does prove that a tight filtration did not significantly change the near > > term characteristics of _those_ particular wines. The filtered vs unfiltered debate will probably never end to everyone's satisfaction, but it's been my observation that some wines are the better for filtration and others poorer. It all depends on the specific wine in question. On balance, however, I'd say that the optimum is to produce clean wines that do not require filtration. That's not the idealist speaking; rather the lazy pragmatist. Unfiltered wines are subjected to less handling. I'm sure that all would agree that less manipulation required between the vine and the bottle reduces the exposure of the wine to deleterious effects of oxygen and spoilage organisms. So sayeth the pragmatist. Less handling of the wine means more free time to surf the web, watch videos, go on vacation or simply _sleep_! That's where the lazy/leisure part comes in. :^) Tom S |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Our local brewshop owner suggested using ascorbic acid rather than
sorbate or potasium metabisulfate as a means to stop yeast. We've done more than a dozen wine kits, half requiring sweetening prior to bottleing, and have had no problems. The ascorbic acid he had on hand was used in beer brewing, and he recommended using the same quantities as were recommended for beer. On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:27:38 -0800, "Tom" > wrote: >For the only the second time I have had a batch of wine that was stabilized, >(sorbate and SO2) that had renewed fermentation in the bottle. Both wines >were sweetend at bottling based on wife tests. Both were crystal clear had >thrown no sediment in months. One was a Brew King kit (no F Pack, sweetend >on my own as the wife thought it was too dry for here tastes) the other from >Grapes. The Pinot Gris ended up a great sparkler! But I am getting tired >of this. I suspect viable yeast were still in the wine, even though the >sorbate would stop reproduction they would still put off CO2. > >Most of my wines are 5-6 gal batches. Before investing in a micron filter >system any suggestions? If filtering is the only way to really sweeten a >wine and not have these problems can I do it in one filter/sweeten/bottle >step? > >Tom > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I thought that odd too. I'm not sure how ascorbic acid can arrest
fermentation at any reasonable level. I'm wondering if the sweetener was sugar or 'wine conditioner'. I have seen bottles of that and it's usually a combination of a sugar and sorbate. I have heard of people using ascorbic acid in place of sulfite, but do not understand the reasoning given. I do not do that; I sweeten, filter and sorbate whites that are going to have any residual sugar. (My filtering setup is far from sterile, it's a minijet.) Regards, Joe (David C Breeden) wrote in message >... > Mike Eaton ) wrote: > >Our local brewshop owner suggested using ascorbic acid rather than > >sorbate or potasium metabisulfate as a means to stop yeast. We've done > >more than a dozen wine kits, half requiring sweetening prior to > >bottleing, and have had no problems. > > >The ascorbic acid he had on hand was used in beer brewing, and he > >recommended using the same quantities as were recommended for beer. > > > Hmm. Ascorbic acid, vitamin C, doesn't stop or prevent > fermentation. It will, however, oxidixe your wine if you don't have > adequate levels of SO2. > > Maybe the shop owner got confused by the linguistic similarity > between sorbate and ascorbic? > > > Dave > ************************************************** ************************** > Dave Breeden |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah, this is bad advice. Ascorbic acid has no effect on yeast, and as
mentioned if you have no Free SO2 it actually accelerates oxidation (especially if you have any residual copper in solution). Wineries add ascorbic as an anti-oxidant (strange I know with whats written above) but always with plenty of Free SO2. Rob L "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message m... > I thought that odd too. I'm not sure how ascorbic acid can arrest > fermentation at any reasonable level. I'm wondering if the sweetener > was sugar or 'wine conditioner'. I have seen bottles of that and it's > usually a combination of a sugar and sorbate. I have heard of people > using ascorbic acid in place of sulfite, but do not understand the > reasoning given. I do not do that; I sweeten, filter and sorbate > whites that are going to have any residual sugar. (My filtering setup > is far from sterile, it's a minijet.) > > Regards, > Joe > > > (David C Breeden) wrote in message >... > > Mike Eaton ) wrote: > > >Our local brewshop owner suggested using ascorbic acid rather than > > >sorbate or potasium metabisulfate as a means to stop yeast. We've done > > >more than a dozen wine kits, half requiring sweetening prior to > > >bottleing, and have had no problems. > > > > >The ascorbic acid he had on hand was used in beer brewing, and he > > >recommended using the same quantities as were recommended for beer. > > > > > > Hmm. Ascorbic acid, vitamin C, doesn't stop or prevent > > fermentation. It will, however, oxidixe your wine if you don't have > > adequate levels of SO2. > > > > Maybe the shop owner got confused by the linguistic similarity > > between sorbate and ascorbic? > > > > > > Dave > > ************************************************** ************************** > > Dave Breeden |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
TN: A love affair renewed | Wine | |||
Sweetening Cider | Winemaking | |||
Sweetening | Winemaking | |||
Perry Fermentation - natural yeasts and malo-latic fermentation | Winemaking | |||
Dilution and sweetening | Winemaking |