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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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


  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
J Dixon
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
>
>



  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom S
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"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


  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Art Schubert
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
>


  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Lum
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"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.




  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
> >
> >

>
>



  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Ray
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
>
>



  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Art Schubert
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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>
  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Ray
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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>



  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Robert Lee
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

Ray's completely correct here, the alcohol tolerance is based on a whole
heap of variables.

To guarantee the yeast you are using is the only yeast you would have to
sterilise (not just sanitise) everything, i.e. steam everything used and
pasteurise/sterile filter the juice. Otherwise the wide variety of yeasts
that are ever present may provide something with a much higher capacity to
ferment than your chosen yeast.

For example, in every winery I have worked in the indigenous yeasts have had
capability to ferment just about anything with sugar (you would assume that
the yeast population over the years gets slanted towards yeasts with some
extreme fermentation properties). We once had some juice stored at 0 deg C,
which started with plenty of free SO2 that started fermenting (we negelcted
to keep checking the FSO2, lesson learnt!).

We also had a case of a yeast contaminating our Sauternes style wine in
barrel. This yeast was quite happy chewing away at the malic acid in the
wine, not the sugars! It took us a long time to figure out what was going
on, the wine was cloudy and fizzy and looked to be sugar fermenting, but the
Baume wasn't dropping. We had to pull it all from barrel and sterile filter
it.

Nature always has a way of mucking your plans up!

Rob L
"Ray" > wrote in message
om...
> 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>

>
>





  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Jack Keller
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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/
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
frederick ploegman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"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


  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Lum
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"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


  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Mike Eaton
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
>
>




  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
David C Breeden
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom S
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"frederick ploegman" > wrote in message
...
>
> "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.


That's fine if you want all your wines to be sweet rocket fuel, but isn't
too useful to the winemaker who wants to produce a spätlese style of wine
(~11% alcohol, 1% RS).

Addressing the original question:
Over the years I've experimented with Côtes de Blanc in Chardonnay. I
really like the aroma and general slow, low foaming fermentations - but the
wine usually stuck off-dry. Most of the wine I tried bottling that way
found a way to re-start in the bottle - usually months or years later. It
usually didn't shoot corks, but the wine was unpleasantly cloudy, gassy and
just didn't taste right anymore. Based on those experiences I'd recommend
against trying that with your wines unless you have refrigerated storage
available.

Tom S


  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
frederick ploegman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

Sorry. Here is a copy of the question I "thought" I was answering:

<copy>.....................
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?
<end copy>.................

Please note the "...without sorbate or filtering...".

I offered my answer as "another point of view", and I feel that it
addressed the question appropriately. BTW - "Spatlese" styles
tend to run closer to 4.5-6% RS. Even "Auslese" styles run
around 2-4% RS.

"Tom S" > wrote in message
om...
>
> That's fine if you want all your wines to be sweet rocket fuel, but isn't
> too useful to the winemaker who wants to produce a spätlese style of wine
> (~11% alcohol, 1% RS).
>
> Tom S
>
>




  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Joe Sallustio
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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

  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Robert Lee
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

A lot of these ferments stop not only because of the alcohol tolerance but
through nutrient depletion.

Another reason could be the sugar composition in the juice used.

If it has high levels of fructose compared with glucose, then the ferment
will generally stop before all the fructose is consumed (most yeasts are
glucophiles). Thus you get a wine which is sweet but relatively stable.

At home, ferment recommencing is meesy and a pain in the arse, commercially
its an absolute disaster, so most winemakers want to be dead sure when
bottling sweet wines.

Rob L
"frederick ploegman" > wrote in message
...
> Sorry. Here is a copy of the question I "thought" I was answering:
>
> <copy>.....................
> 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?
> <end copy>.................
>
> Please note the "...without sorbate or filtering...".
>
> I offered my answer as "another point of view", and I feel that it
> addressed the question appropriately. BTW - "Spatlese" styles
> tend to run closer to 4.5-6% RS. Even "Auslese" styles run
> around 2-4% RS.
>
> "Tom S" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > That's fine if you want all your wines to be sweet rocket fuel, but

isn't
> > too useful to the winemaker who wants to produce a spätlese style of

wine
> > (~11% alcohol, 1% RS).
> >
> > Tom S
> >
> >

>
>
>





  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Greg Cook
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

On 12/14/03 5:33 PM, in article
, "Robert Lee"
> wrote:

> At home, ferment recommencing is meesy and a pain in the arse, commercially
> its an absolute disaster, so most winemakers want to be dead sure when
> bottling sweet wines.


Now there's a new one. Would you define "meesy" ?

Thanks.

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

(remove spamblocker from my email)

  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
JEP
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

"frederick ploegman" > wrote in message >...

> I offered my answer as "another point of view", and I feel that it
> addressed the question appropriately. BTW - "Spatlese" styles
> tend to run closer to 4.5-6% RS. Even "Auslese" styles run
> around 2-4% RS.
>


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you may have wanted to say
Kabinett rather than Auslese. Auslese "usually" contain more residual
sugar than Spatlese (up in the 8%-10% range and can be much higher).
Kabinett tends to be in the 2%-4% range (unless trocken is also on the
label).

The above is a generalization because there is no law determining the
amount of residual sugar left in the German QMP wines. The laws deal
with the sugar level before fermentation. The amount of RS is up to
the wine maker (for now).

Andy
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
JEP
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

"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
  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
J Dixon
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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



  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
frederick ploegman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"JEP" > wrote in message
m...
> "frederick ploegman" > wrote in message

>...
>
> > I offered my answer as "another point of view", and I feel that it
> > addressed the question appropriately. BTW - "Spatlese" styles
> > tend to run closer to 4.5-6% RS. Even "Auslese" styles run
> > around 2-4% RS.
> >

>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you may have wanted to say
> Kabinett rather than Auslese. Auslese "usually" contain more residual
> sugar than Spatlese (up in the 8%-10% range and can be much higher).
> Kabinett tends to be in the 2%-4% range (unless trocken is also on the
> label).
>
> The above is a generalization because there is no law determining the
> amount of residual sugar left in the German QMP wines. The laws deal
> with the sugar level before fermentation. The amount of RS is up to
> the wine maker (for now).
>
> Andy


Yes. Thank you. I lived and worked in Germany for 9 years, but
that was a quarter of a century ago and I am now at the age where
my memory is not what it used to be. IIRC - in ascending order of
sweetness they were (are?) Kabinett, Auslese, Spatlese, Eiswine.
This is based on some rather ancient records of tests I conducted
on commercial wines (which is not to say that I may not be wrong
in this). I have no idea what the current laws and regulations might
be. Thanks again.




  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Robert Lee
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

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




  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom S
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation

> "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


  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Tom S
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"frederick ploegman" > wrote in message
...
> I am now at the age where
> my memory is not what it used to be. IIRC - in ascending order of
> sweetness they were (are?) Kabinett, Auslese, Spatlese, Eiswein.


Close, but you have Spätlese and Auslese reversed. And where are
Beerenauslese and Trockenbeerenauslese?

Tom S


  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
frederick ploegman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Sweetening & Renewed Fermentation


"Tom S" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "frederick ploegman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I am now at the age where
> > my memory is not what it used to be. IIRC - in ascending order of
> > sweetness they were (are?) Kabinett, Auslese, Spatlese, Eiswein.

>
> Close, but you have Spätlese and Auslese reversed. And where are
> Beerenauslese and Trockenbeerenauslese?
>
> Tom S
>
>


Yup - Thanks. It's been a long time. :O)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TN: A love affair renewed Mark Lipton[_1_] Wine 2 02-12-2007 04:09 PM
Sweetening Cider JoeyB Winemaking 5 03-01-2007 07:19 PM
Sweetening Hoss Winemaking 7 09-09-2006 02:31 AM
Perry Fermentation - natural yeasts and malo-latic fermentation norm Winemaking 1 30-04-2004 01:52 PM
Dilution and sweetening bwesley7 Winemaking 6 25-02-2004 02:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"