After making wine for 5 years, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not
sure I know the difference between gross and fine lees.

I have a fresh batch of red, which I pressed near the end of its
primary fermentation. It's now in carboys with a SG showing that the
primary is completely done. Each carboy has about 2 inches of sediment
(after settling for 1 day). This is all dead yeast cells, etc...no
recognizeable grape parts other than a few seeds.

My inclination is to rack off of this stuff immediately, but I've read
that leaving some fine lees will add complexity and flavor. So, should
I just rack and leave a little bit of this sediment?

For that matter, what is your routine racking schedule for reds?

Lee

Lee wrote:
> After making wine for 5 years, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not
> sure I know the difference between gross and fine lees.

See
http://members.tripod.com/~BRotter/Surlie.htm
for definitions (under "Lees control: types and quantity").

> primary is completely done. Each carboy has about 2 inches of sediment
> (after settling for 1 day). This is all dead yeast cells, etc...no
> recognizeable grape parts other than a few seeds.

If you're sure it's dead yeast cells and not fruit debris then that
would qualify as (desirable) fine lees. (Though certain particulates in
(undesirable) heavy lees can take a day to settle.)

> My inclination is to rack off of this stuff immediately, but I've read
> that leaving some fine lees will add complexity and flavor. So, should
> I just rack and leave a little bit of this sediment?

If you're sure the existing lees is fine lees, you can just leave it.
If not, I'd rack. If you rack, you could always retain the lees and add
it back later if you see that the racked wine is low in lees!

Ben

The site on sur lie is very helpful. But I've also got a few lees questions,
and have posted photos for a visual. The photos describe my sediment
situation better than what I can in writing. The photos may also describe
what others are experiencing at this point. I hope what you see will provide
enough information to answer my questions.

Go to: www.africusrex.com/temp The question on the temp site, and the
pictures are self explanitory.

Looking forward to answers and suggestions.

Jeff

"Lee" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> After making wine for 5 years, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not
> sure I know the difference between gross and fine lees.
>
> I have a fresh batch of red, which I pressed near the end of its
> primary fermentation. It's now in carboys with a SG showing that the
> primary is completely done. Each carboy has about 2 inches of sediment
> (after settling for 1 day). This is all dead yeast cells, etc...no
> recognizeable grape parts other than a few seeds.
>
> My inclination is to rack off of this stuff immediately, but I've read
> that leaving some fine lees will add complexity and flavor. So, should
> I just rack and leave a little bit of this sediment?
>
> For that matter, what is your routine racking schedule for reds?

2 inches of sediment in a 5 gallon carboy is _not_ fine lees. You want to
get the wine off as much of that as you can before it has a chance to go
reductive (H2S) on you.

The wine above that 2 inches is surely not clear. The stuff suspended in it
is the fine lees. Of course there's some of that in the bottom layer too,
but trying to separate that from the gross lees is impossible.

In general, I try to rack the wine from the stuff that settles within a
couple of hours of pressing. I quarrantine the heavy lees at that point for
further settling. After a month or so, I'll rack it and add it back to the
main lot or use it for topping if it hasn't developed any off character.

Tom S

jeff wrote:
> Go to: www.africusrex.com/temp The question on the temp site, and the
> pictures are self explanitory.

I would agree with your assessment. What you label "Fine lees?" in the
images would, however, likely consist of a mixture of what would
technically be defined as gross *and* fine lees. I would recommend
racking to get the wine off all the sediment pictured. The sediment
appearing after this racking would certainly be "fine lees". Whether
you chose to stir this lees is a stylistic choice - there'd certainly
be no harm in doing it. One warning, however, if you are going sur lie
in an inert vessel then it would be wise to regularly check the wine
since this environment is conducive to causing reductive problems.
Stirring (with slight oxygenation) would be wise.

Tom S:
> 2 inches of sediment in a 5 gallon carboy is _not_ fine lees. You want to
> get the wine off as much of that as you can before it has a chance to go
> reductive (H2S) on you.

The original post never said it was a 5 gallon batch, but if that's the
case I'm with Tom he it's unlikely that 2 inches of sediment could
be classed as fine lees and I'd recommend racking.

Ben

In article .com>, Ben
Rotter > writes
>
>The original post never said it was a 5 gallon batch, but if that's the
>case I'm with Tom he it's unlikely that 2 inches of sediment could
>be classed as fine lees and I'd recommend racking.
>
If I may join in. Gross lees and fine lees are among the many new things
about winemaking I have learned from this group, I can understand that a
heavy lees of fruit, veg, and or grape debris could begin to decompose
and send up bubbles of CO2, thus cause a need of racking.

What I don't understand is why subsequent deposits after the first
racking, i.e. fine lees, are classed as desirable. I have always racked
off those too as part of the clearing process and to make the wine ready
for storage prior to bottling. What does fine lees contain other than
dead yeast cells, clearing agents, etc. which is beneficial to the wine?
TIA.
--
Alan Gould. North Lincolnshire, UK.

"Alan Gould" > wrote in message
...
> What I don't understand is why subsequent deposits after the first
> racking, i.e. fine lees, are classed as desirable. I have always racked
> off those too as part of the clearing process and to make the wine ready
> for storage prior to bottling. What does fine lees contain other than
> dead yeast cells, clearing agents, etc. which is beneficial to the wine?

The autolysis products of the dead yeast cells are considered to add
desirable qualities to the wine aged in their presence. The French
anthropomorphize the effect, claiming that "the lees feed the wine".

I've noticed that wines aged "sur lie" seem richer, with better mouth feel
and improved integration between fruit and oak.

OTOH, if your objective is crisp, pure fruit flavors you probably do not
want to age on the lees.

Tom S

Take what I say as my opinion as it may not match the suggestions of some of
those above.

First -- There is no such word as "immediate" in wine making. Drop it from
your vocabulary.

What you are describing is certainly gross leas. You will not get 2 inches
of fine leas. When you press your fruit some of the meat will pulverize and
come through as very tiny particles the stay in suspension as long as
fermentation is keeping things stirred up. But you do not have to get the
wine off of it immediately. It has been in your wine ever since you started
the fermentation and a few weeks more will not hurt anything. If 2 inches
have dropped out in a day or so, then there is a lot more that will drop
out. If you rack in every day or every few days as more drops out you will
loose a lot of wine. Every time you rack you will loose 1/2 inch or so as
you need to stop above the sediment.

Leave it alone for 2 or 3 weeks so most of it will drop out. Then get rid
of most of the "gross" sediment with one racking and you can let the fine
leas that drop out after that set in the wine for another 2 or 3 months.
Then when you do your second racking you will be rid of virtually all the
sediment and you can start worrying about clearing the wine of particulates
that are not settling out that cause cloudiness if there is a problem.

It is true that if you leave the gross leas for several months you can have
a problem with H2S. But a few weeks or up to a month is not going to cause
a problem. You don't want to end up doing 4 or 5 or more racking, each of
which looses wine, when you do not have to.

Ray

"Lee" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> After making wine for 5 years, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not
> sure I know the difference between gross and fine lees.
>
> I have a fresh batch of red, which I pressed near the end of its
> primary fermentation. It's now in carboys with a SG showing that the
> primary is completely done. Each carboy has about 2 inches of sediment
> (after settling for 1 day). This is all dead yeast cells, etc...no
> recognizeable grape parts other than a few seeds.
>
> My inclination is to rack off of this stuff immediately, but I've read
> that leaving some fine lees will add complexity and flavor. So, should
> I just rack and leave a little bit of this sediment?
>
> For that matter, what is your routine racking schedule for reds?
>
> Lee
>

In article >, Tom S
> writes
>The autolysis products of the dead yeast cells are considered to add
>desirable qualities to the wine aged in their presence. The French
>anthropomorphize the effect, claiming that "the lees feed the wine".
>
>I've noticed that wines aged "sur lie" seem richer, with better mouth feel
>and improved integration between fruit and oak.
>
>OTOH, if your objective is crisp, pure fruit flavors you probably do not
>want to age on the lees.
>
I am grateful for that information, but unfortunately I am unable to
unscramble the jargon. Could you please explain it in plain English?
--
Alan Gould. North Lincolnshire, UK.

I want to do an ML on my wine after alcoholic fermentation is over. My
plan is to press the juice out of the skins add So2 to about 50ppm
wait 1 month then rack, add oak chips and ML culture and let it sit
over the summer. I have read that I need some fine lees for the ML to
occur. My question is would there be enough fine lees or should I rack
sooner or does it even matter?

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:31:27 GMT, "Ray Calvert"
> wrote:

>Take what I say as my opinion as it may not match the suggestions of some of
>those above.
>
> First -- There is no such word as "immediate" in wine making. Drop it from
>your vocabulary.
>
>What you are describing is certainly gross leas. You will not get 2 inches
>of fine leas. When you press your fruit some of the meat will pulverize and
>come through as very tiny particles the stay in suspension as long as
>fermentation is keeping things stirred up. But you do not have to get the
>wine off of it immediately. It has been in your wine ever since you started
>the fermentation and a few weeks more will not hurt anything. If 2 inches
>have dropped out in a day or so, then there is a lot more that will drop
>out. If you rack in every day or every few days as more drops out you will
>loose a lot of wine. Every time you rack you will loose 1/2 inch or so as
>you need to stop above the sediment.
>
>Leave it alone for 2 or 3 weeks so most of it will drop out. Then get rid
>of most of the "gross" sediment with one racking and you can let the fine
>leas that drop out after that set in the wine for another 2 or 3 months.
>Then when you do your second racking you will be rid of virtually all the
>sediment and you can start worrying about clearing the wine of particulates
>that are not settling out that cause cloudiness if there is a problem.
>
>It is true that if you leave the gross leas for several months you can have
>a problem with H2S. But a few weeks or up to a month is not going to cause
>a problem. You don't want to end up doing 4 or 5 or more racking, each of
>which looses wine, when you do not have to.
>
>Ray
>
>"Lee" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>> After making wine for 5 years, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not
>> sure I know the difference between gross and fine lees.
>>
>> I have a fresh batch of red, which I pressed near the end of its
>> primary fermentation. It's now in carboys with a SG showing that the
>> primary is completely done. Each carboy has about 2 inches of sediment
>> (after settling for 1 day). This is all dead yeast cells, etc...no
>> recognizeable grape parts other than a few seeds.
>>
>> My inclination is to rack off of this stuff immediately, but I've read
>> that leaving some fine lees will add complexity and flavor. So, should
>> I just rack and leave a little bit of this sediment?
>>
>> For that matter, what is your routine racking schedule for reds?
>>
>> Lee
>>
>

In my sparkling wines it's a sort of creamier taste and feel.
Joe

"Jim" > wrote in message
...
>I want to do an ML on my wine after alcoholic fermentation is over. My
> plan is to press the juice out of the skins add So2 to about 50ppm
> wait 1 month then rack, add oak chips and ML culture and let it sit
> over the summer.

A better plan would be to add ML culture immediately at dryness (after
pressing, settling and racking away from the gross lees) and BEFORE you add
any sulfite. ML has a tough time going when you're gassing those little
bugs with SO2!

Be sure to keep the wine topped up and airlocked during ML, as you won't
have the protection of SO2.

BTW, you might find in future that it's a good idea to throw the majority of
the wood chips into the fermenter. The flavors meld better that way, and
you'd only need to do a small addition later to achieve the desired oak
level.

Tom S

"Ray Calvert" > wrote in message
m...
> It is true that if you leave the gross leas for several months you can
> have a problem with H2S. But a few weeks or up to a month is not going to
> cause a problem.

I beg to differ with you!

I've seen H2S arise from the lees as early as within a couple of days after
pressing. An early racking to get the wine off of the heaviest crud
forestalls this problem very easily and effectively. As an added benefit,
you can then age the bulk of the wine sur lie - a trend that seems to have
become very popular lately among boutique commercial wineries.

If you're concerned with losses, you always have the option to retain the
lees for subsequent resettling in a much smaller container.

The point is, dealing with an H2S problem is _much_ harder than simply
avoiding it.

Tom S

Jeff,
With that small amount of wine and large lees volume, consider centrifuging
the lees down to extract as much wine as possible. Tom S had insight on this
awhile ago and I've since bought an old clothes washer and hard wired it to
spin only. I haven't converted the pulleys to spin faster or remove the
brake (much better results would ensue) but an hour or so in the basket (in
containers, of course) settles out a significant amount of useable wine to
top off after losing so much in the racking operation.


Patrick

"jeff" > wrote in message
...
> The site on sur lie is very helpful. But I've also got a few lees
> questions, and have posted photos for a visual. The photos describe my
> sediment situation better than what I can in writing. The photos may also
> describe what others are experiencing at this point. I hope what you see
> will provide enough information to answer my questions.
>
> Go to: www.africusrex.com/temp The question on the temp site, and the
> pictures are self explanitory.
>
> Looking forward to answers and suggestions.
>
> Jeff
>

Now there's a cool idea. It's a bit late for me to get into it this season,
but a 4, 6, or 12 bottle centrifuge would be an interesting
concept--although, even though the concept is easy to visualize, I'm
wondering about the logistics of engineering such a thing withouth creating
an imbalance at high rpm. The bottles would have to be filled exactly or
there would be severe speed wobble. Or there would need to be an adjustable
balance on the arms to fine tune it.

I'm visualizing something that holds 4 bottles on gimbals, with an electric
motor (small), so that the centrifuge allows the bottles to adjust into the
horizontal position as the rpm increases. As the motor slows, the gimbals
allow the bottls to settle. When rpm is zero, the bottls hang vertical.

Hey, maybe an old ceiling fan motor. Low rpm, for an extended period of
time.

I think this could easily become a topic outside this post.

Jeff

"patrick mcdonald" > wrote in
message ...
> Jeff,
> With that small amount of wine and large lees volume, consider
> centrifuging the lees down to extract as much wine as possible. Tom S had
> insight on this awhile ago and I've since bought an old clothes washer and
> hard wired it to spin only. I haven't converted the pulleys to spin faster
> or remove the brake (much better results would ensue) but an hour or so in
> the basket (in containers, of course) settles out a significant amount of
> useable wine to top off after losing so much in the racking operation.
>
>
> Patrick
>
> "jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The site on sur lie is very helpful. But I've also got a few lees
>> questions, and have posted photos for a visual. The photos describe my
>> sediment situation better than what I can in writing. The photos may also
>> describe what others are experiencing at this point. I hope what you see
>> will provide enough information to answer my questions.
>>
>> Go to: www.africusrex.com/temp The question on the temp site, and the
>> pictures are self explanitory.
>>
>> Looking forward to answers and suggestions.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>

Ray Calvert wrote:
> It is true that if you leave the gross leas for several months you can have
> a problem with H2S. But a few weeks or up to a month is not going to cause
> a problem.

I disagree with that too. The order of weeks can certainly be
problematic with regards to reductive problems. Of course, it depends
on the turbidity and the size of the vessel, but in some cases H2S can
be seen within a week.

> You don't want to end up doing 4 or 5 or more racking, each of
> which looses wine, when you do not have to.

Racking isn't solely a process for clarification, oxygen exposure
should also be considered. Racking should be conducted with both in
mind.

Ben

> I am grateful for that information, but unfortunately I am unable to
> unscramble the jargon. Could you please explain it in plain English?

When yeast cells die they break down, releasing their "guts" into the
wine. Some compounds from the "guts" can be beneficial to the wine by,
for e.g., providing nutrients for malolactic bacteria, enhancing
tartrate stability, modifying flavour, and/or increasing mouthfeel.

Ben

Thanks Tom and Ben. I do not dispute your statements at all and I am sure
that what you say is true. I can only say that I have not had a problem
doing it the way I stated.

I think it does go to show that winemaking is a total process. Somehow, the
total way I make wine has not had this problem where their method has. My
method may have other problems that their method does not. Certainly, not
every batch I make comes out the way I want it to. I started not worrying
about gross leas when I heard about wineries leaving their wine on the skins
for 3 to 4 weeks to get maximum color extraction. Other things led to it as
well.

Eventually every winemaker must developed an over all method that works for
him and, even if a qualified expert says he should do things differently, he
should deviate from that method carefully. For this reason I recommend that
new winemakers get a good book on winemaking that outlines general
procedures and learns from it so he gets a total procedure down rather than
trying to learn from this group where he will get bits and pieces of many
procedures. He can then get advise from this group and deviate from the
procedure in the book until he has developed his own method.

Ray

"Ben Rotter" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Ray Calvert wrote:
>> It is true that if you leave the gross leas for several months you can
>> have
>> a problem with H2S. But a few weeks or up to a month is not going to
>> cause
>> a problem.
>
> I disagree with that too. The order of weeks can certainly be
> problematic with regards to reductive problems. Of course, it depends
> on the turbidity and the size of the vessel, but in some cases H2S can
> be seen within a week.
>
>> You don't want to end up doing 4 or 5 or more racking, each of
>> which looses wine, when you do not have to.
>
> Racking isn't solely a process for clarification, oxygen exposure
> should also be considered. Racking should be conducted with both in
> mind.
>
> Ben
>

In article .com>, Ben
Rotter > writes
>> I am grateful for that information, but unfortunately I am unable to
>> unscramble the jargon. Could you please explain it in plain English?
>
>When yeast cells die they break down, releasing their "guts" into the
>wine. Some compounds from the "guts" can be beneficial to the wine by,
>for e.g., providing nutrients for malolactic bacteria, enhancing
>tartrate stability, modifying flavour, and/or increasing mouthfeel.
>
Thanks again Ben. Is that malolactic bacteria the same as the one which
causes malolactic fermentation [MLF?]
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.

jeff wrote:

> Now there's a cool idea. It's a bit late for me to get into it this season,
> but a 4, 6, or 12 bottle centrifuge would be an interesting
> concept--although, even though the concept is easy to visualize, I'm
> wondering about the logistics of engineering such a thing withouth creating
> an imbalance at high rpm. The bottles would have to be filled exactly or
> there would be severe speed wobble. Or there would need to be an adjustable
> balance on the arms to fine tune it.
>
> I'm visualizing something that holds 4 bottles on gimbals, with an electric
> motor (small), so that the centrifuge allows the bottles to adjust into the
> horizontal position as the rpm increases. As the motor slows, the gimbals
> allow the bottls to settle. When rpm is zero, the bottls hang vertical.
>
> Hey, maybe an old ceiling fan motor. Low rpm, for an extended period of
> time.

The washing machine tub and sheetmetal enclosure have the advantage of
being a reasonably good safety containment vessel in case a bottle lets
loose. I'm concerned your ceiling fan model would be a safety
concern.... we could nickname it "The Flinger".

Slower rotation speed for a longer period of time will work, but why
wouldn't you opt for the washing machine spin cycle speed?

Gene
>
> I think this could easily become a topic outside this post.
>
> Jeff
>
> "patrick mcdonald" > wrote in
> message ...
>
>>Jeff,
>>With that small amount of wine and large lees volume, consider
>>centrifuging the lees down to extract as much wine as possible. Tom S had
>>insight on this awhile ago and I've since bought an old clothes washer and
>>hard wired it to spin only. I haven't converted the pulleys to spin faster
>>or remove the brake (much better results would ensue) but an hour or so in
>>the basket (in containers, of course) settles out a significant amount of
>>useable wine to top off after losing so much in the racking operation.
>>
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>"jeff" > wrote in message
...

wrote "I'm visualizing something that holds 4 bottles on gimbals, with
an electric motor (small), so that the centrifuge allows the bottles to
adjust into the horizontal position as the rpm increases. As the motor
slows, the gimbals allow the bottls to settle. When rpm is zero, the
bottls hang vertical.
------------------------------------------ you could duct
tape the bottles to a mower blade for really fast separation.....just
kidding,lucas

"gene" > wrote in message
. ..
> jeff wrote:
>
>> Now there's a cool idea. It's a bit late for me to get into it this
>> season, but a 4, 6, or 12 bottle centrifuge would be an interesting
>> concept--although, even though the concept is easy to visualize, I'm
>> wondering about the logistics of engineering such a thing withouth
>> creating an imbalance at high rpm. The bottles would have to be filled
>> exactly or there would be severe speed wobble. Or there would need to be
>> an adjustable balance on the arms to fine tune it.
>>
>> I'm visualizing something that holds 4 bottles on gimbals, with an
>> electric motor (small), so that the centrifuge allows the bottles to
>> adjust into the horizontal position as the rpm increases. As the motor
>> slows, the gimbals allow the bottls to settle. When rpm is zero, the
>> bottls hang vertical.
>>
>> Hey, maybe an old ceiling fan motor. Low rpm, for an extended period of
>> time.
>
> The washing machine tub and sheetmetal enclosure have the advantage of
> being a reasonably good safety containment vessel in case a bottle lets
> loose. I'm concerned your ceiling fan model would be a safety concern....
> we could nickname it "The Flinger".
>
> Slower rotation speed for a longer period of time will work, but why
> wouldn't you opt for the washing machine spin cycle speed?
>
> Gene

My concern with the washingmachine is the high rpm g-forces and restricted
working space for bottle attachments.Yes, the cieling fan concept would
require some kind of enclosure, but I like the gentleness of it (it doesn't
have to be attached to the cieling).

Jeff

"jeff" > wrote in message
news
> Now there's a cool idea. It's a bit late for me to get into it this
> season, but a 4, 6, or 12 bottle centrifuge would be an interesting
> concept--although, even though the concept is easy to visualize, I'm
> wondering about the logistics of engineering such a thing withouth
> creating an imbalance at high rpm. The bottles would have to be filled
> exactly or there would be severe speed wobble. Or there would need to be
> an adjustable balance on the arms to fine tune it.
>
> I'm visualizing something that holds 4 bottles on gimbals, with an
> electric motor (small), so that the centrifuge allows the bottles to
> adjust into the horizontal position as the rpm increases. As the motor
> slows, the gimbals allow the bottls to settle. When rpm is zero, the
> bottls hang vertical.

That'd be great, but what works for me is an old washing machine. The tub
holds twelve 2 liter bottles, standing upright. The G force compacts the
lees against a vertical wall of the bottle, but the solids tend to stay in
place even after turning off the machine, allowing the relatively clear wine
or juice to be decanted fairly cleanly.

BTW, balance isn't all that critical. Washing machines are built to be
pretty forgiving of eccentric loading. Still, it's not a bad idea to
balance full bottles opposite bottles appropriately weighted with water.

This centrifuge works better on lees from finished wine than it does on
juice lees, but it's still good on juice. My yield from either juice or
wine lees is usually about 50%. The lees that remain are often too thick to
pour, so I throw away the bottles because they're too hard to clean out.

Tom S