Another thing I'd do is add a range of oak toasts to your wine. I
think that this more closely emulates a barrel in that the outer most
surface of the barrel is the darkest toast while subsequent layers of
the barrel represent lighter toasts. I haven't developed proportions
though, I just added a single toast to one of mine and thought the
effect wasn't enough.

Chris

"pp" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I've seen in other places that oak chips are completely extracted
> within about 2 weeks, while oak beans (like Stavin) take several
> months. Tom, can you clarify if you meant beans or chips in your post?

I have more experience with "beans" than chips, and still more with barrels.
I've also played around with Innerstaves and most recently with Vintage
Alternatives' "barrel replacements". Not bad - but not the same as a new
barrel. Still, at $800+ for new French barrels, the alternatives are
starting to look pretty attractive.

Tom S

Be careful with the oak chips.

I left a merlot in carboy with oak chips for several months and it came
out way tannic. It dissipated a bit with age (1 year+), but still was
overwhelming to our taste. Finally, had to fine twice with gelatin to
get it down to a desirable level.

I think I know more about what oak does and how to proceed now. It
looks like Pambianchi was talking about his process and not the
physical properties of oak.

Thank you for all the advice; I've incorporated it into my plan. I'll
be oaking a Sauvignon Blanc (about 1g/L, light toast no sawdust) for a
short time. The idea here is to educate my palate, so I'll split the
batch and see how oak affects the wine in a side by side comparison.

My question about oak tannin had more to do with mead. I now intend to
split a batch of mead and oak it for a long time (same quantity and
preparation as the Sauv Blanc, but leave it in up to a year).

Erroll

"Erroll Ozgencil" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'll be oaking a Sauvignon Blanc (about 1g/L, light toast no sawdust) for
> a
> short time. The idea here is to educate my palate, so I'll split the
> batch and see how oak affects the wine in a side by side comparison.

FWIW, I recommend that you get the oak into the fermenter itself and carry
it through into bulk aging until it tastes slightly overoaked, then rack the
wine off the oak and lees. The fermentation tends to "polish" the rough
edges off the oak and the flavors become better integrated in the finished
product. Of course that makes it trickier to split the batch.

Tom S

I'd be careful oaking a mead. You don't want to cover the honey aroma.
But then I prefer my Sauv Blanc unoaked too.

Chris

Tom,

Could you elaborate a little on the thinking behind the practice of adding
oak chips into the fermenter itself? I assume it's an attempt to simulate
the practice of barrel fermentation. Obviously the oak chips are present
during MLF as well and the practice of sur lees aging. Specifically are you
aware of any real evidence of improvement over, for example, adding the oak
chips once primary fermentation is completed. If I understand you correctly
you're suggesting adding the oak chips as soon as you innoculate the must
with yeast.

As I've mentioned before, I add oak chips to spent barrels. I feel this
gives me the advantage of traditional barrel aging without frequent
replacement while still benefitting from the oakiness imparted by chips. As
you say, French oak and other suitable alternatives are getting very pricey.

Cheers,
Glen Duff
---------
"Tom S" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "Erroll Ozgencil" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I'll be oaking a Sauvignon Blanc (about 1g/L, light toast no sawdust) for
>> a
>> short time. The idea here is to educate my palate, so I'll split the
>> batch and see how oak affects the wine in a side by side comparison.
>
> FWIW, I recommend that you get the oak into the fermenter itself and carry
> it through into bulk aging until it tastes slightly overoaked, then rack
> the wine off the oak and lees. The fermentation tends to "polish" the
> rough edges off the oak and the flavors become better integrated in the
> finished product. Of course that makes it trickier to split the batch.
>
> Tom S
>

pp wrote:
> Tom S wrote:
> >
> > Well that's simply wrong! Oak chips will definitely add tannin to
> wine, up
> > until the point they are completely extracted. That may take a
> number of
> > months.
> >
>
> I've seen in other places that oak chips are completely extracted
> within about 2 weeks, while oak beans (like Stavin) take several
> months. Tom, can you clarify if you meant beans or chips i your post?
>
> Thx,
>
> Pp

The reason for the time difference is the time it takes for the wine to
soak through the beans/chips/sawdust. The more surface area vs.
volume, the quicker the wine can get in and extract as much as it can.
So sawdust is the fastest, followed by chips, followed by beans.

I've understood that extraction is complete about the same time the oak
becomes "waterlogged" and some of it sinks to the bottom of the carboy.
Keeping it in longer than that doesn't have a material effect on the
wine, from what I understand.

Finally, I was listening to a seminar about the use of barrels given by
a successful commercial winemaker, and they stated that it's their
opinion that oxygenization of wine through barrel staves is not what he
believes happens. In the barrel staves, you get wine soaking into the
wood some distance, though not all the way through. This sets up a
wine-air interface, with the wood acting as catalyst for any number of
reactions, not the least of which is evaporation of wine out of the
barrel. You of course get extraction from the wood as well. His point
is that in any properly contained barrel, opening the bung always shows
some level of vacuum inside, signifying that material is leaving the
barrel more than material is entering the barrel. I say this FWIW, but
whether it's oxygenization or the creation of a long term wine-air
interface within the staves that's really happening, beans/chips/dust
won't allow this to occur, and that's the difference between adding oak
via barrel or not.

Rob

"Rob" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I was listening to a seminar about the use of barrels given by
> a successful commercial winemaker, and they stated that it's their
> opinion that oxygenization of wine through barrel staves is not what he
> believes happens. In the barrel staves, you get wine soaking into the
> wood some distance, though not all the way through. This sets up a
> wine-air interface, with the wood acting as catalyst for any number of
> reactions, not the least of which is evaporation of wine out of the
> barrel. You of course get extraction from the wood as well. His point
> is that in any properly contained barrel, opening the bung always shows
> some level of vacuum inside, signifying that material is leaving the
> barrel more than material is entering the barrel.

I see no evidence to support the catalytic effect he alludes to, and all the
rest amounts to a distinction without a difference.

There is indeed a partial vacuum created in the barrel as water and alcohol
leave through the staves. According to what I've read, that headspace
formed is oxygen depleted compared to air. Whether that is due to the in
situ degassing of the wine's carbon dioxide, or to some other effect is
unclear to me.

Tom S

Perhaps catalyst was the wrong word. I think his point was that it was
a very special interface, with all three components (wine, air, wood)
available for more interesting chemical reactions than if just two of
them were available. Mind you, he didn't give a lot of science behind
his talk (it wasn't meant to be - it was a 90 minute talk-and-sample
type presentation, not a dissertation), so again, FWIW.

Also, were the headspace low-oxygenated due to CO2 degassing, its
interesting to ponder how much has to be leaving through the staves for
there to still be a vacuum.

Rob

"Erroll Ozgencil" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I want to experiment with oak, so I've been re-reading the oak barrel
> chapter in Pambianchi's "Techniques in Home Winemaking". Barrels are
> too big a step for me, so I skimmed until I got to the part about oak
> chips. He says that oak chips, "do not add any significant amount of
> tannins, and as such, cannot be used for ageing wine."

Well that's simply wrong! Oak chips will definitely add tannin to wine, up
until the point they are completely extracted. That may take a number of
months.

The difference between aging on oak chips in a carboy and barrel aging is
the slow infusion of oxygen through the staves which softens the wine over
time. Carboys are not permeable in that way.

Do not attempt to mimic that diffusion by simply leaving headspace in your
carboys! It's _not_ the same at all. You'd get an entirely different
effect, and I assure you that you wouldn't like it.

Tom S