# Sterile filter vs sorbate



## Stressbaby (Apr 4, 2017)

I have some fruit wines which will need to be backsweetened a little bit. Due to an adverse outcome with a small batch of blackberry 2 years ago, I'm considering sterile filtering them prior to backsweetening, rather than using sorbate. Good idea or bad idea?


----------



## Boatboy24 (Apr 4, 2017)

Didn't think it was cost effective for us home winemakers to sterile filter.


----------



## NorCal (Apr 4, 2017)

The best economic home filter I could find is .5 micron, vs .45 micron for sterile filtering.


----------



## BernardSmith (Apr 4, 2017)

I wonder whether "sterile" filtering will not strip flavor and even some color from your wine? There's no free lunch and if the filter is small enough to hold back yeast cells I think that it may be small enough to block some of those larger molecules you may want. Then there is the factor that your wine needs to be perfectly clear to allow it to flow though those filters without the filters being blocked by all kinds of particles too small for you to notice before you pull the wine through those tiny holes...


----------



## Boatboy24 (Apr 4, 2017)

BernardSmith said:


> I wonder whether "sterile" filtering will not strip flavor and even some color from your wine? There's no free lunch and if the filter is small enough to hold back yeast cells I think that it may be small enough to block some of those larger molecules you may want. Then there is the factor that your wine needs to be perfectly clear to allow it to flow though those filters without the filters being blocked by all kinds of particles too small for you to notice before you pull the wine through those tiny holes...



Don't commercial wineries sterile filter?


----------



## Scooter68 (Apr 4, 2017)

I guess my take is that unless done perfectly and and into perfectly clean bottles it's still a gamble on top of the other issues of color and flavor stripping.


----------



## stickman (Apr 4, 2017)

Here is another thread on this.

http://www.winemakingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52323


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 4, 2017)

Some commercial wineries don't filter at all, but they are rapidly becoming the odd man out. As a commercial winery we used to only sterile filter our whites, and use 2.5 micron filters for our reds. This was plate and frame filtration using filter pads made from diatomaceous earth. It was a pain in the ***, we had a lot of loss, and we needed to do another pass with .80 micron pads in order to filter out yeasts cells like brettanomyces.

I did a good amount of research on the subject personally when we began considering using a local cross flow filtration system service and found no proof that filtration had any adverse effect on sensory perception. We started using this sterile cross flow filtration (0.35 cents per gallon + few hundred dollar setup fee) system a few years ago and I am completely sold. Our loss is way, way down and to be honest, both red and white wines taste better after they go through the filter. It's amazing the impact all those tiny little solids have on the flavor. No worries about re-fermentation, spoilage, or sediment, and it's cheap.

Granted I am talking about commercial volumes here and obviously 10-15 gallons of loss per lot is an absolute deal breaker for home winemakers, but the concept is the same. Sterile filtration done right is awesome. If you can do it right for your volumes, you are golden.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2017)

BernardSmith said:


> I wonder whether "sterile" filtering will not strip flavor and even some color from your wine? There's no free lunch and if the filter is small enough to hold back yeast cells I think that it may be small enough to block some of those larger molecules you may want.



Molecules are REALLY small. From a previous thread:



ou8amaus said:


> I know there are a few that will disagree with me, but I filter all my wines down to 1 micron, whites and reds. Most commercial vineyards go down to almost .5 to achieve a sterile filter... I remember hearing once that flavour molecules compared to sterile filter is like throwing a ping pong ball through soccer netting. In other words flavour molecules much too small to get caught in any filter we could do at home.





sour_grapes said:


> Not bad, but not dramatic enough. If the "flavor molecules" are the size of a ping pong ball, the gaps in the filter would be more like the distance BETWEEN THE SOCCER GOALS (on opposite ends of the soccer pitch).


----------



## Johny99 (Apr 4, 2017)

Thanks for the input skeenatron. 

I've talked to our local wineries and they all sterile filter their whites. Most don't filter their reds, a choice. I'd love to be able to sterile filter whites to be able to leave a bit of sugar. If anyone figures an economical way to do that for 5 gallons, let me know!


----------



## BernardSmith (Apr 4, 2017)

sour_grapes said:


> Molecules are REALLY small. From a previous thread:



I hear you but why do so many commercial wineries only filter their whites and not their reds?


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 4, 2017)

BernardSmith said:


> I hear you but why do so many commercial wineries only filter their whites and not their reds?



Half of those that claim they don't filter their reds, actually do. There is a very negative connotation that comes with filtration.

Some believe that those molecules that are responsible for flavor are attached to the solids that will be filtered out, which would strip flavor. Which is hard to prove otherwise. Some wineries just don't do it because their winemaker is old school.

At the end of the day, there is very little research done on the effects of filtration on reds. Changes in mouth feel, flavor, potential for loss and oxidation are all real concerns. With whites you just don't have a choice, it needs to be clear and you cannot allow microbes to be present with residual sugar.


----------



## jburtner (Apr 4, 2017)

sour_grapes said:


> Molecules are REALLY small. From a previous thread:



Sounds like we'd be turning wine into water or close to it if we had the appropriate filter.

I on the other hand would very much prefer the inverse majick trickery.

Cheers!
-johann


----------



## GreginND (Apr 4, 2017)

Boatboy24 said:


> Don't commercial wineries sterile filter?



I only filter down to 0.8 microns. I do use sorbate and I bump my SO2 levels up to about 1.5 molecular. I've never had a problem with fermenting in the bottle.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2017)

BernardSmith said:


> I hear you but why do so many commercial wineries only filter their whites and not their reds?



This is just speculation, but maybe it is as simple as the appearance of whites suffers more from some debris than the appearance of reds does. Filtering is costs time and money, after all.


----------



## Johnd (Apr 4, 2017)

sour_grapes said:


> This is just speculation, but maybe it is as simple as the appearance of whites suffers more from some debris than the appearance of reds does. Filtering is costs time and money, after all.



I just finished a bottle of 2012 Bell Merlot. Got a little sediment in my mouth on the last sip, some left in the glass, couldn't care any less, but it'd be ugly in a white wine.....


----------



## Julie (Apr 5, 2017)

Stressbaby

what was the "adverse outcome" that you mentioned


----------



## Scooter68 (Apr 5, 2017)

I'll bet that even the wineries that do filter their reds don't at the same level as their whites. For all those reasons discussed above. Any non-white wine going into a dark bottle isn't going to offend the vast majority of folks. When that last glass has a little 'dust' in it that's just a sign of a 'real wine.' At least that's my take on it. 

If I ordered a bottle of wine while dining out, I wouldn't be bugged by that dust in a red wine especially if I didn't even notice it until the last glass was poured. On a white, that dust just sitting at the bottom would draw my attention all through the meal.


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 5, 2017)

The cool thing about the latest filtration technology (cross flow) is that it's cheap, fast, easier on the wine (one single pass to get sterile), and has insanely low loss. If you are planning on filtering reds at all, why not cross flow? You will never have to worry about brettanomyces blooms or anything other spoilage microorganis for that matter. It blows plate and frame technology out of the water.


----------



## grapeman (Apr 5, 2017)

For those with home wineries or even small commercial ones, the cross flow technology that is considered cheap by some would never work (unless you are very wealthy). A search of available small units turned up this one for an example. http://www.gwkent.com/crossflow-filter-xf-1.html
At almost 40 grand, it is well beyond my reach. Unless you have a service available to you like skeenatron I think this is beyond most peoples price range.


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 5, 2017)

Ha ya buying one is crazy. 35 cents a gallon is not though. Of course filtering by any means is expensive and not for most home winemakers. Then again, if you are small enough, there are little nugget filtration options.


----------



## Johny99 (Apr 6, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> Ha ya buying one is crazy. 35 cents a gallon is not though. Of course filtering by any means is expensive and not for most home winemakers. Then again, if you are small enough, there are little nugget filtration options.



"Little nugget filtration options"?

Please, tell more


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 6, 2017)

Oh well I just meant something like this

https://morewinemaking.com/products/buon-vino-super-jet-filter.html?gclid=CjwKEAjwq5LHBRCN0YLf9-GyywYSJAAhOw6mCuTqQz8korY7R-5NR5WJ7N923L8Bs6Hg_SgyfG7knBoCvprw_wcB

I don't know anything about how well they work and if you can get .45 or .5 micron pads for them, but for doing small home winemaking volumes, the plate and frame technology is tried and true.


----------



## skeenatron (Apr 6, 2017)

Honestly if you aren't using old oak barrels that have never seen ozone, and are really good about sanitation and all that, I'd say skip trying to filter small volumes of red wine. It's not worth the trouble. Whites with sugar and malic acid in it still however, I'd think sterile filtration of some sort is kind of a must right? No one wants cloudy whites or bottles exploding.


----------



## Johnd (Apr 6, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> I don't know anything about how well they work and if you can get .45 or .5 micron pads for them, but for doing small home winemaking volumes, the plate and frame technology is tried and true.



For both the Buon Vino Mini Jet and Super Jet, you can get Coarse Pads - 5 Micron, Polishing Pads - 1.8 Micron, and "Super Sterile" - .5 Micron.

I have a Super Jet, it works very well, although I don't do much filtering, mostly just on whites and low end kits that I want to move fast. Haven't ever used the .5 micron pads, mostly just the polishing pads. Once you get proficient in use, there is very little waste on small batches of wine.


----------



## Stressbaby (Apr 6, 2017)

@Julie,
Speaking here without my notes, but two of three judges noted "geranium." This was a blackberry wine which did not (deliberately) go through MLF. I used sorbate and back sweetened and interestingly, according to my notes, I added both the same day. 

I have the Buon Vino Mini Jet with 0.5 micron filters which is what I planned to use. 

Thanks for these and any future replies.


----------



## hounddawg (Apr 6, 2017)

I know very little, I make country wines from recipes from as far back as 1825, I use as many old ingredients as possible, but I vacuum rack bottle filter, and there is a reason you use 1 micron for whites an 5 microns for reds, again I don't have these peoples grey matter, but my wine in my tiny pond is sought after, and I use potassium sorbet not a .45 micron sterol filter, just my 2-cents worth, Bernard, Arne, JohhD and many more can tell you the technical aspect of this, me I just deal with polished decent taste that even thought you cant taste the alcohol it still kicks like a mule,,,
just a poor dumb hillbilly
DAWG::
Dawg


----------



## GreginND (Apr 7, 2017)

skeenatron said:


> Honestly if you aren't using old oak barrels that have never seen ozone, and are really good about sanitation and all that, I'd say skip trying to filter small volumes of red wine. It's not worth the trouble. Whites with sugar and malic acid in it still however, I'd think sterile filtration of some sort is kind of a must right? No one wants cloudy whites or bottles exploding.



It is all about risk management. I do not trust my ability to do a sterile filtration, even with my cartridge. I know that it is not possible for me in my winery at the moment to ensure 100% that all my lines, bottles, etc are thoroughly sterilized. Sanitary, yes, but certainly not sterile. Thus, I don't bother with the expense and effort to try. I filter my whites and sweet reds to 0.8 microns and my red wines to 1.5 microns.

Our cold climate wines are usually high in acid which helps for stability. And I bump up my SO2 beyond what is recommended for vinifera (0.5/0.8 molecular) and use sorbate at levels that most would never taste it.

My wines are most likely sold and consumed within a year or two. So, I think I have mitigated as much risk as possible. Of course, there is still a small risk of problems. But as a home winemaker following these practices for 20 years, I've only had one wine ever ferment in the bottle and I've never had a ML go. I have some wines still that are 15 years old with no problems.


----------



## Stressbaby (Apr 8, 2017)

I'm not really considering doing this for the appearance of the wine. The wine is already plenty clear enough. 

I'm only considering doing this to avoid having to use the sorbate.


----------

