# Making Wine like a winery....



## agdodge4x4

I have visited a few wineries and they all seem to NOT backsweeten their wines. They say the grapes are sweet enough as they are and they start off at 24% sugar, end at 12% alcohol or so and the wines are sweet like they should be.

My question is, how do they ever do this reliably? Do they test it hourly until the alcohol content is just right and stabilize it?

If I wanted to do this at home, so that I don't have to backsweeten, what is the method to do it? We like our wines sweet...like 1/2C of sugar to the gallon sweet.

How could I accomplish that by putting the right amount of sugar in before fermentation starts and stopping it when its ready?


----------



## winemaker_3352

My guess would be the type of yeast used.

If you use a yeast that tolerates only a 12% ABV and the Brix harvested at was 24 or higher - then it would end up sweet.


----------



## cpfan

agdodge4x4 said:


> How could I accomplish that by putting the right amount of sugar in before fermentation starts and stopping it when its ready?


For the home winemaker, stopping the ferment is the fun part. It's pretty hard to stop active yeast. I'm not sure how wineries stop the yeast but some have large stainless steel tanks with cooling jackets around them. I bet that getting the wine cold, plays a big part in stopping the ferment.

Steve


----------



## winemaker_3352

cpfan said:


> For the home winemaker, stopping the ferment is the fun part. It's pretty hard to stop active yeast. I'm not sure how wineries stop the yeast but some have large stainless steel tanks with cooling jackets around them. I bet that getting the wine cold, plays a big part in stopping the ferment.
> 
> Steve



That makes sense - once they stop - they probably sulphite it, sorbate it, and filter out the yeasties.


----------



## robie

They have to filter out the yeast completely. It takes a very special and expensive filtration system to filter out all the yeast from a wine.

If even one live yeast is left in a wine that still has sugar, fermentation will start again. If even one wild yeast gets into the wine it will start fermenting again. I would assume they would also have to add sorbate.

Same problem if they use a low alcohol tolerant yeast, which dies when the alcohol content gets high enough. What if a wild yeast comes along?

Some wineries dump brandy into the fermenting wine. Enough of it will kill the yeast instantly, but that adds a lot of alcohol to the wine.

Freezing or very cold temps can stop yeast, but they can warm and start working again.

The commercial wine makers I have spoken with will generally ferment to dry, then back sweeten. Although, I do know not all wines are made sweet this way, as some do use filtration.

The moral of the story - don't try this at home; just ferment to dry, add sorbate, then back sweeten; you likely won't be able to tell the difference, except for the alcohol level.


----------



## Runningwolf

Is it possible for a winery to stop a fermentation, yes. I have high doubts if many of them do it. The risks are high. I also don't believe everything they tell the public. They all have their secrets and thats business.


----------



## agdodge4x4

I don't know, I just know that the ones I talked to said they do NOT back sweeten. So, how they accomplish sweet wine without doing that...well, there are only a handful of ways to do it.

Personally, I ferment to dry, then right before bottling, I take a little of the wine and sweeten it with 1/2 cup invert sugar, put it back in the jug, swirl it around a bit to mix, and then it goes straight into the bottles. I don't test anything...I know that 1/2 cup of sugar in a gallon of 995 wine is perfect for our tastes.

So far, so good, but I was just curious about the commercial wineries.


----------



## mmadmikes1

Red Grape wines that are sweet suck(my opinion) but the wineries I have been into during production do add sugar. I watched them do it. Most commercial wines are filtered so they look better and to prevent sediment in bottles. If they are sat they stopped fermentation, I don't believe it.Risk is to high.
White wines like Rieslings are sweetened using swiss reserve method. Yes they add sulfate and sorbate to most, read the labels. They do sweeten if they are making a sweet wine


----------



## Midwest Vintner

robie said:


> They have to filter out the yeast completely. It takes a very special and expensive filtration system to filter out all the yeast from a wine.
> 
> If even one live yeast is left in a wine that still has sugar, fermentation will start again. If even one wild yeast gets into the wine it will start fermenting again. I would assume they would also have to add sorbate.
> 
> Same problem if they use a low alcohol tolerant yeast, which dies when the alcohol content gets high enough. What if a wild yeast comes along?
> 
> Some wineries dump brandy into the fermenting wine. Enough of it will kill the yeast instantly, but that adds a lot of alcohol to the wine.
> 
> Freezing or very cold temps can stop yeast, but they can warm and start working again.
> 
> The commercial wine makers I have spoken with will generally ferment to dry, then back sweeten. Although, I do know not all wines are made sweet this way, as some do use filtration.
> 
> The moral of the story - don't try this at home; just ferment to dry, add sorbate, then back sweeten; you likely won't be able to tell the difference, except for the alcohol level.



Filtering out yeast isn't that expensive, but it may not work. Filters are not perfect. Filters have efficiency ratings and none are 100%. The jackets are for slowing the fermentation process or cold stabilization/separating solids, typically. Wild yeast does not ferment very high usually, so that is not usually the issue. The yeast used on site might still exist is the primary problem. It might jump into the batch again from another wine or still be alive after whatever treatment was implemented. I am not sure if adding brandy to wine is even legal. You cannot add anything to a product like wine without disclosing it on the label, typically. I know our license prohibits us from doing certain things such as this. "Contains Sulfites," is a term that does NOT imply that sulfites were added to the wine by themselves, but that the product has a certain amount of them. Many fruits naturally have enough sulfites to require the term on the label. I'm not sure if ANY wine is actually sulfite free, but can get the term with a very small amount in it. It's not about the addition of sulfites during production, but just having them at all.

Grape wineries use a brix tester and typically have control over their product in some way whether it's their grapes or are contracted/vouched for from a vineyard. I think most wineries have their own methods, as do home wine makers. Trying to stop a fermentation doesn't seem to be a good method, but controlling what goes into the wine to begin with, works much better.

I'm not saying how we do it.  

I'm going to have to agree with everyone, technically. All methods are probably done by different wineries. The amount of money you have and how you make your wine, may determine your choice of how things are employed in wine making. The tried and true method of most wineries, especially the smaller ones, is to just let it kill itself. Whether that is by not giving it enough sugar or using a less tolerant abv yeast to begin with.


----------



## docanddeb

"Sweet" is a relative term. I have had people say that Merlot is too SWEET. Balance of acid can make a huge difference in the "perception" of SWEET. We all like what we like. Ice Wine is SWEET!!!!!!! Glycerin can increase the perception of SWEET. There are a lot of "tricks of the trade" to sell wine. When you find a commercial wine you like... test it. Find out the acid level and the SG. Test many... you'll find much variation, yet you like them all. The palate is a tricky thing!

Debbie


----------



## Midwest Vintner

docanddeb said:


> "Sweet" is a relative term. I have had people say that Merlot is too SWEET. Balance of acid can make a huge difference in the "perception" of SWEET. We all like what we like. Ice Wine is SWEET!!!!!!! Glycerin can increase the perception of SWEET. There are a lot of "tricks of the trade" to sell wine. When you find a commercial wine you like... test it. Find out the acid level and the SG. Test many... you'll find much variation, yet you like them all. The palate is a tricky thing!
> 
> Debbie



SO TRUE!!! I used to HATE high tannic/high acidic wines, now I'm more receptive to different styles. We have been playing with wine now for 7 years (dang time flies!!!) and have been tweaking and changing things constantly. I think getting the best finish is the hardest part. I very much agree with your assessment after doing my own logging and testing. Could not believe it sometimes.


----------



## joea132

Runningwolf said:


> Is it possible for a winery to stop a fermentation, yes. I have high doubts if many of them do it. The risks are high. I also don't believe everything they tell the public. They all have their secrets and thats business.



I've got to agree here. The most award winning winery in our area which focuses on sweeter wines backsweetens. He just came out on top of the Finger Lakes this last year too and swears against filtering. Think of the energy costs and labor that would go into chilling, filtering and shocking the yeast. It would not be sound business practice to go through all this when you can achieve the same result in one step.


----------



## robie

docanddeb said:


> "Sweet" is a relative term. I have had people say that Merlot is too SWEET. Balance of acid can make a huge difference in the "perception" of SWEET. We all like what we like. Ice Wine is SWEET!!!!!!! Glycerin can increase the perception of SWEET. There are a lot of "tricks of the trade" to sell wine. When you find a commercial wine you like... test it. Find out the acid level and the SG. Test many... you'll find much variation, yet you like them all. The palate is a tricky thing!
> 
> Debbie



The alcohol level can also add a perception of sweetness. Actually, alcohol under about 40% ABV does taste sweet.

That's why really fruit-forward wines, made from very ripe (higher brix) fruit can have a little hint of sweetness - more from the higher alcohol than anything else.


----------



## grandwinecellar

*wine*

You are rirht. All wine is found 24% sugar and 12% alcohol and till taste is so Sweet.


----------



## Manimal

joea132 said:


> Think of the energy costs and labor that would go into chilling, filtering and shocking the yeast. It would not be sound business practice to go through all this when you can achieve the same result in one step.



The problem I have with this line of argument is the assumption that the result is the "same." Most (but not all) producers of really top quality sweet/off-dry wines do so by stopping fermentation, not adding sugar back post-fermentation. And having experience with wines made both ways (both commercially and at home), I can say with certainty that backsweetening generally results in a simpler, somewhat flat and diluted wine compared to wines created by halting fermentation.

By the way, it is not all that hard to stop fermentation. If the wine is fermented cool to start with so that it progresses slowly, it is relatively easy to rack it off the lees, sulphur and chill the wine which will stop fermentation relatively quickly. The wine is then kept cold and once it settles clear, it is racked again and sterile filtered (or you could use sorbate.)


----------



## Midwest Vintner

Manimal said:


> The problem I have with this line of argument is the assumption that the result is the "same." Most (but not all) producers of really top quality sweet/off-dry wines do so by stopping fermentation, not adding sugar back post-fermentation. And having experience with wines made both ways (both commercially and at home), I can say with certainty that backsweetening generally results in a simpler, somewhat flat and diluted wine compared to wines created by halting fermentation.
> 
> By the way, it is not all that hard to stop fermentation. If the wine is fermented cool to start with so that it progresses slowly, it is relatively easy to rack it off the lees, sulphur and chill the wine which will stop fermentation relatively quickly. The wine is then kept cold and once it settles clear, it is racked again and sterile filtered (or you could use sorbate.)




I am not so sure. IMO, having sugars left are going to taste sweet. Distinguishing between residual sugar left after fermentation and backsweetened wine should be nill. The only arguement I can see from that stand point, is that you are not allowing the wine to kill itself and thus possibly lower the H2S created. I would like some examples of wines that do are for sure doing this. These wineries must be large as it would be very cost prohibitive for a smaller winery. I know that stone hill winery has cooling jackets for cold "seperation" as they call it and for cold stabilization from touring. Not sure if they are chilling and killing yeast or how they are doing it. I know that their wines are not the greatest, but are descent.

Also, do you not think that filtering to .45 micron does any harm to the wine?

I'm not trying to be an arse, but I would like a descent discussion on this subject.


----------



## Sirs

couldn't they do similar to what I do when I'm wanting to make a wine with not so much alcohol? What I do is make 2 batches of same wine at the same time, 1 I will make normal for me which is keep adding sugar till the yeast dies from the alcohol and the other I let ferment dry normally at 12% or close to it once done the higher abv. one will normally be a bit sweet or at least seem to be. I'll then blend the 2 together to get a semi sweet but lower abv. wine no sorbate no nothing. I don't stop fermentation I just do it different. Of course this is with wild yeast so not sure what wine yeast would do doing this.


----------



## ibglowin

Here is how I suspect the big boys are doing it. This is Chateau St. Michelle in Woodinville, WA. They are one of the largest producers of wine in the US. This is their white wine production room. The large pot on the left hand side is a centrifuge and on the right is a huge plate filter. I think they can get rid of all the yeast they need to with this set up. They make some of the best off dry Riesling and Gewurztraminer available for the $$ IMHO.


----------



## AlFulchino

i wanted to see what Mike would post..beautiful picture....and i like Dan's answer...secrets too


----------



## Manimal

I work in the wine industry in Niagara, and I can attest to the fact that few quality-minded producers making serious sweet or off-dry wines in this region are adding sugar post fermentation. Sure, adding sugar is widely practiced for entry level wines, but it is generally frowned upon for higher quality wines. 

Adding a very small amount of sugar to tweak the balance of a wine would not likely have any negative impact and may improve it, however if you need to add enough sugar to make a dry wine sweet or off-dry that is a pretty major addition. I find wines made this way tend to lack the depth of flavour and intensity of wines produced by retaining natural residual sugar and the balance is often awkward... an off-dry Riesling with 12% alc. just doesn't seem as well balanced as one with 10% alc. and naturally occurring residual sugar. Also, I've never heard of any winemakers who have had any more significant problems with H2S in wines produced this way than in their regular ferments.

In addition, you're not really killing the yeast through this method, just dropping the temperature enough to make fermentation stop and then removing the yeast through racking/filtration.



> Also, do you not think that filtering to .45 micron does any harm to the wine?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see any viable alternative for commercial wineries for sweet wines. Sorbate can cause off-aromas/flavours and as such is not an option for premium wines. And since most aromatic compounds and colloids which may impact mouthfeel are smaller than .45 microns in white wines (some large phenolic complexes in reds may be large enough to be disturbed by filtration) I don't see any high chance of quality loss by sterile filtration provided it is performed carefully. Also, you don't need to use sterile filtration for the initial clarification. Yeast cells are usually about 1 micron in size and so a coarse filtration followed by about .65 to 1 micron will effectively remove enough of the yeast cells to inhibit fermentation provided the wine is kept cool. Sterile filtration would be needed immediately prior to bottling.
> 
> I don't think that making wines through this process is inherently more suited to large producers. It is much easier to chill down a small volume of wine quickly than a large one. Most premium producers here have cooling jackets with glycol systems, immersible chilling plates or small heat exchangers. Sure, most of these tools are expensive, but if a winery wants to produce premium wine they are worth the money. I'm sure there are budget methods for achieving the same ends, also... winemakers are generally masters of innovation when they need to be.
> 
> Our industry here is made up of only a few large wineries with most producers being small to mid-size (<15,000 cases.) Most of the premium producers practicing the method I've talked about above are on the small side.
> 
> Sorry for the long-winded response, but I think that this is an interesting topic and I want to be sure that any home winemakers thinking of making a sweet wine by attempting to stop fermentation have an accurate understanding of the potential risks _and_ benefits. I often think that home winemakers shy away from certain techniques due to unfounded fear and lack of experience. Also, I wanted to stick up for the commercial wineries since I work in the industry and I think that most quality producers are pretty upfront about their production methods with little to hide.
Click to expand...


----------



## ibglowin

Great input, thank you!


----------



## AlFulchino

ditto !!!


----------



## Midwest Vintner

Manimal said:


> Adding a very small amount of sugar to tweak the balance of a wine would not likely have any negative impact and may improve it, however if you need to add enough sugar to make a dry wine sweet or off-dry that is a pretty major addition. I find wines made this way tend to lack the depth of flavour and intensity of wines produced by retaining natural residual sugar and the balance is often awkward... an off-dry Riesling with 12% alc. just doesn't seem as well balanced as one with 10% alc. and naturally occurring residual sugar. Also, I've never heard of any winemakers who have had any more significant problems with H2S in wines produced this way than in their regular ferments.
> 
> In addition, you're not really killing the yeast through this method, just dropping the temperature enough to make fermentation stop and then removing the yeast through racking/filtration.
> 
> Also, do you not think that filtering to .45 micron does any harm to the wine?
> 
> I don't see any viable alternative for commercial wineries for sweet wines. Sorbate can cause off-aromas/flavours and as such is not an option for premium wines. And since most aromatic compounds and colloids which may impact mouthfeel are smaller than .45 microns in white wines (some large phenolic complexes in reds may be large enough to be disturbed by filtration) I don't see any high chance of quality loss by sterile filtration provided it is performed carefully. Also, you don't need to use sterile filtration for the initial clarification. Yeast cells are usually about 1 micron in size and so a coarse filtration followed by about .65 to 1 micron will effectively remove enough of the yeast cells to inhibit fermentation provided the wine is kept cool. Sterile filtration would be needed immediately prior to bottling.
> 
> I don't think that making wines through this process is inherently more suited to large producers. It is much easier to chill down a small volume of wine quickly than a large one. Most premium producers here have cooling jackets with glycol systems, immersible chilling plates or small heat exchangers. Sure, most of these tools are expensive, but if a winery wants to produce premium wine they are worth the money. I'm sure there are budget methods for achieving the same ends, also... winemakers are generally masters of innovation when they need to be.




If you are dropping temps in a fermenting wine, you do risk straining the wine and possible H2S. Now, I'm not sure how fast the glycol systems work, but like you said, larger quantity tanks will be harder to change temperatures in, which may be an issue. Trying to filter twice with those sized filters doesn't ensure success, but the cool temperatures might. Problem being, knowing how fast the chill works on bringing down temps and then at what point it stops fermenting. I agree about sorbate causing off flavors, but they do temper with age and are very minimal in a full bodied wine. 

A 2% change in alcohol will change almost any wine. I have not tasted, side by side, the same wine with only residual sugar and back-sweetened for wine with the same alcohol content and yeast. As you stated, there was about a 2% difference, which is about what I have also experienced (using a lalvin yeast vs a red star yeast). We have made wine with residual sugar and back sweetened the same type of wine using those yeasts. We actually preferred the back sweetened wine in that comparison, but it was minimal sweetening and the yeasts were different. We like to play with our yeast


----------



## agdodge4x4

OK, so what would the procedure be if I wanted to put all my sugar in at the beginning and get it to a semi sweet wine in the end without backsweetening?

I can only think of two ways to do it:

1.) Figure out how much sugar I like in my finished wine, and add that in addition to whatever it takes to make it finish at 11-12%. This would require monitoring SG daily, maybe even twice a day until it got where I wanted it, then sorbating it, right?

2.) Figure out how much sugar I like in my finished wine, get a yeast that can tolerate somewhere close to my finished wine alcohol percent (say Montrachet is I can handle 13%) and then make that calculation and let it run until the yeast kills itself.


Right? I have the standard procedure down, this is mostly for my education, experimentation, etc. Im wanting to try this because I feel like the less 'messing around' with my wine, the less its exposed to oxygen and the better off it will be. If this works, then its one less time my wine is exposed before bottling.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Anything that has residual sugar from any source is sterile filtered in a commercial setting prior to bottling. Another method while technically back sweetening in its approach is a Reserve Method. Some unfermented juice is reserved at Crush for Reds and Pressing for Whites and then added to the dry wine to increase the desired sweetness. This has not only the effect of adding sugar but to also add and increase nose and flavors to the wine. By the way if you plan on stopping early, you cannot use published alcohol tolerances for yeast as a guide. Many will go far beyond the published capability. If you want to stop the ferment, the easiest is for a Amateur winemaker is to arrive at the desired brix level remove the wine off the lees, chill below 40, sorbate, fine, and filter in that order. 
Malvina


----------



## tatud4life

Runningwolf said:


> Is it possible for a winery to stop a fermentation, yes. I have high doubts if many of them do it. The risks are high. I also don't believe everything they tell the public. They all have their secrets and thats business.


 
I agree. My wife and I took a tour of Sugarland Cellars in Gatlinburg, TN and we saw their fermentation tanks. (Actually, you don't have to take the tour to see them. They are in their showroom for all to see.) their tanks are water jacketed and they do stop the fermentation process by chilling the wine and they run the wine through a filter. Some of their wines are really sweet. Plus, they are very helpful and informative. I'm sure though that they do not divulge all their secrets.


----------



## hvac36

Found this on the subject thanks Wine Maker Mag....


*How do you sterile filter your wine? *
IssueOct/Nov 2004




Dear Wine Wizard, I have a 2003 Chardonnay aging in my garage. I have about 65 gallons, which I initially fermented at about 40 degrees F (4 degrees C) for four months and then moved to oak. The wine fermented slowly and is now at 1% residual sugar and has completed malolactic fermentation. It is a very fruity, semi-sweet wine that is no longer fermenting. Rather than attempting to restart fermentation, I am inclined to bottle it as is. I don't want to mess it up trying to get rid of the residual sugar. I have just purchased a filter system. The finest filter pads that it has are 0.5 micron nominal. I understand this to mean that it will stop half of the 0.5 micron particles. Is this fine enough for sterile filtration so that I can bottle this wine without worry of fermentation starting in the bottle? And do you think I should even put my wine through a sterile filtration?_Mike Johnston Watsonville, California_*Wine Wizard replies:* The short answer to your question is: 0.45 micron nominal filter pads are the industry standard for "sterile" filtration. These pads prevent all yeast and bacteria from getting through. So, if you want to be as certain as possible, it's best to filter with a 0.45 micron nominal pad. This will ensure that you take out the maximum amount of unwanted material. The 0.5 micron filter sheet is a little bit "looser" than the 0.45 micron sheet and would most likely allow some microbes to pass through. If I was a winery with 50,000 gallons of 1% RS (residual sugar) Chardonnay that I wanted to bottle and put into the market, I would certainly make sure to final-filter with the tightest pads possible. Ruining thousands of customers' opinions about your products due to one little yeast cell is a scary prospect. However, as you might imagine, I've got a longer answer for you and you can choose what option best suits you. You're a home winemaker with only 65 gallons of the 1% RS Chardonnay, not 50,000 gallons. I should explain a little bit about filter and filtration jargon for those of us that might not be familiar with words like "0.45 micron nominal filter." Pad filters are stacks of cellulose sheets that get mounted in a stainless steel or metal frame. Wine or juice is forced by a pump or by air pressure through the cellulose pads and depending upon the "tightness" of the cellulose matrix and the back pressure on the system, a varying degree of particles will pass through. When we say "nominal" and list a measurement like "0.45 micron" we are talking about the size of a filter pad. This pad is designed to prevent particles larger than the specified size (e.g. 0.45 micron) to pass through. Not all filters available to home winemakers offer a true 0.45 micron nominal filter pad. Many only go as small as 0.5 micron nominal which is not truly a "sterile" filter. It is very close, but no cigar (as the saying goes). Bacteria, especially, because they are so much smaller than yeast cells, could get through filters with this porosity. Once they're in, they can start munching on the sugar left in your wine and cause re-fermentation in the bottle. This is exactly what you're trying to avoid. However - you might be willing to take the risk because in your case, I actually think that the 0.5 micron filter would cut out enough microbial life to render you a relatively stable product. If you are very careful in your sanitation, filtering and bottling processes, I'd say it's an acceptable risk. Your wine fermented slowly, went through malolactic fermentation and is not fermenting now - so it's pretty stable (microbially speaking). It's also a white wine, which means that you probably would be consuming it within a year or two. Most importantly - you love the wine the way it is and don't want to conduct a re-fermentation to decrease the residual sugar to a more stable level._For more of the Wine Wizard's wisdom, pick up the latest issue of WineMaker magazine now available at better home winemaking retailers and newsstand locations._


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Excuse me for being skeptical but 40 degrees is a bit too cold to do any fermenting and MLF is impossible at that temperature. Yet it is stated to be completed. MLF certainly not under 6o degrees. As far as filter material porosity you can buy a cartridge filter at 2.5 microns. Does this solve the problem? Not really. While you are on the safe side a true sterile BOTTLING LINE is the real issue not just the filtering. Think of all that Blush Zinfandel in a wine store, ever see any one of them re-fermenting? It is not just about the filtering but the entire bottling procedure that is next to impossible to recreate in an Amateur setting.


----------



## saramc

Commercial bottling lines vary from shop to shop. It it is quite difficult to maintain a true "sterile" environment when bottling wine, as an amateur (and I would bet my bottom dollar that unless you are a multi-million dollar commercial shop, you don't have a true "sterile" bottling setup). And by sterile, I am talking aseptic, no organisms, even your hands are sterile (thinking hospital). The definition of sterile bottling is simply not what people think. Some commercial shops have big buck "enclosed" bottling lines, but others have gravity fillers with 3-6-12,etc spouts...relying upon the cleanliness and sanitizing up to the staff (just like us at home). When I hear sometime talking about sterile bottling, they are usually talking about the filtering process. Just my experience.


----------



## Runningwolf

Saramac, I agree with you. There is a big difference between sterile filtering and a sterile bottling line. I believe this thread started out as talking about sterile filtering which most wineries do. Most wineries all sanitize everything throughout the process also, but sterilizing everything in not done or necessary where alcohol is involved. It is imparitive that everything is perfectly cleaned and then sanitized.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

saramc said:


> Commercial bottling lines vary from shop to shop. It it is quite difficult to maintain a true "sterile" environment when bottling wine, as an amateur (and I would bet my bottom dollar that unless you are a multi-million dollar commercial shop, you don't have a true "sterile" bottling setup). And by sterile, I am talking aseptic, no organisms, even your hands are sterile (thinking hospital). The definition of sterile bottling is simply not what people think. Some commercial shops have big buck "enclosed" bottling lines, but others have gravity fillers with 3-6-12,etc spouts...relying upon the cleanliness and sanitizing up to the staff (just like us at home). When I hear sometime talking about sterile bottling, they are usually talking about the filtering process. Just my experience.


Yes what you say is true that is why Amateurs must take careful steps of sanitation, proper storage temperatures and the use of the proper amount of sorbate to be avoid issues. The presence of 12-14 percent alcohol is not going to protect the wine from organisms.


----------



## jswordy

We left far behind in this discussion the prospect of yeast designed to help the process by promptly expiring at certain alcohol levels. Many of the wines I see are 9 or 10% abv, quite low compared to a homemade wine which runs 12% and above. When you factor in stainless tanks that allow lees to be quickly drawn out of valves at the bottom (as opposed to drawing wine off the top of the lees), the potential sulphur problem can be well managed, I would think.

I have home winemaker friends who use chest freezers to chill the wine and promote flocculation and settling of lees. I can't see why large wineries wouldn't do it, then. A yeast designed to die at 10%, chilling the wine with a device similar to a wort chiller, then drawing off lees from the bottom would all serve well, I would think. Finish with a fine filter.

Not all wineries are secretive. Some vintners are more reticent than others, but I've also had lively conversations, especially at the smaller places.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

I agree with what you are saying except I am not familiar with any yeast with a tolerance of only 10%.


----------



## jswordy

MalvinaScordaad said:


> I agree with what you are saying except I am not familiar with any yeast with a tolerance of only 10%.


 
Me neither but they may have access to yeasts we do not get.

Even if not, they could chill them and drain the sediment. Filter prior to bottling. I am not saying they do, just that it is possible.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

I think we can get all the yeasts that are commercially available. Maybe not in the amounts most small producers use but the 1kg brick is pretty much the industry standard packaging amount. But it is exactly about chilling, racking and filtering if you want to stop it before it finishes.


----------



## grapeman

I'm not sure all yeasts are available to home winemakers, at least in the small packet size. Lalvin puts out a half dozen for home winemakers, yet there are dozens of commercial ones. I'm not sure of the alcohol tolerance of the commercial ones, but I'm pretty sure the information is available. Here is a link to Lallemand yeast sold as the Lalvin brand. There are many not available to home winemakers.
http://www.lallemandwine.com/spip.php?rubrique33&id_mot=19&lang=en


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

If you rely on 80 gram packets then you are limited. But if you can handle 500grams then you have all the choices available. 
Malvina


----------



## Runningwolf

Many of these 500 gram yeasts are available at Presque Isle.


----------



## ibglowin

500/5 = 100 (6 gallon batches) for the beloved "Amateur" wine maker........

Suppose I could "scale up" my process!


----------



## Deezil

It's still 30-ish of my 15-16gal batches  

Does it freeze well or... Whats the best way to keep a package that large, for that long? Is it possible or would you just end up throwing the 2nd half out?... Maybe find someone local to split a yeast with? What are we lookin at here, to play with all the yeasties...


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

If stored using a vacuum food saver and kept cool not frozen there is no problem using the yeast the following year with a 10 to 15 % increase in volume of yeast the second year even a third year is possible.
Malvina


----------



## Rock

Deezil said:


> It's still 30-ish of my 15-16gal batches
> 
> Does it freeze well or... Whats the best way to keep a package that large, for that long? Is it possible or would you just end up throwing the 2nd half out?... Maybe find someone local to split a yeast with? What are we lookin at here, to play with all the yeasties...


Vacuum pack it is what we do.


----------



## altavino

Encapsulated yeast can be used . Pro dessert is designed for this purpose

All you do is chill and pull the bag of yeast out when you hit the desired residual sugar, add your sorbate and sulfite as insurance . 

Easy !

http://morewinepro.com/view_product/6185//Encapsulated_Wine_Yeast_-_ProDessert_BA-11_83_g_1_mesh_bag


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Right you are! That is a great solution to stopping the ferment. Remove and Chill. On second look Scott Labs has a few other varieties that have some very specific uses.


----------



## Rock

altavino said:


> Encapsulated yeast can be used . Pro dessert is designed for this purpose
> 
> All you do is chill and pull the bag of yeast out when you hit the desired residual sugar, add your sorbate and sulfite as insurance .
> 
> Easy !
> 
> http://morewinepro.com/view_product/6185//Encapsulated_Wine_Yeast_-_ProDessert_BA-11_83_g_1_mesh_bag


Why would you sorbate and sulfite?How would Mlf work with this?


----------



## ibglowin

Not very well if you sorbate thats for sure!


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Well Rock since you ask. Who says you need to MLF? There are wines ,usually whites, or blush ( products of saingnee) that you fore go MLf to retain maximum fruit forward qualities. Recently I did this with a GSM Saingee and produced a very fruity Rose. But I did back sweeten with sugar.


----------



## altavino

the sulfite is as a preservative and the sorbate is extra insurance , with an encapsulated yeast ferment , there is the possibility of some yeast excapeing , and there is alos the issue of wild yeast . unless you are a commercial winemaker with crossflow or some other form of absolute filter technology you should always add sorbate to residule sugar wines. unless you want to risk handgrades in your cellar.

what you do with encapsulate yeast is remove the bulk of the yeast in the encapsulated bag making it much easier to stop the ferment .

as for the mlf question , you NEVER do mlf on residule sugar wines , unless you like VA that is.

you also want the higher acid to balance the sugar .


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

altavino said:


> t
> as for the mlf question , you NEVER do mlf on residule sugar wines , unless you like VA that is.
> 
> .



That is a good point. But I it is possible to back sweeten one that has undergone MLf and all the above steps mentioned are performed before adding the sugar.


----------



## altavino

it is possible but why would you do it?
unless you were working with some hybrid cold climate grapes with acid levels above 12g/l .

even then you'd want to make sure your so2 levels are high and lysosyme are added.

but again I have to ask , why would you sweeten an mlf wine? the two are at cross purposes and add risk when done together.


----------



## Midwest Vintner

My main thought here is this, does residual sugar taste different than backsweeteing? I think that real sugar, such as cane or beet, tastes very similar. Would that mean that residual sugar is the same? Or is there another process that makes the difference by going dry? The only thing I can think of, is when yeasts die slowly, off flavors can arise. Furthermore, is it possible to get 13-14% abv and be semisweet (1.010+) without adding sugar? I think wine that stays under 12% will typically be better than a wine that is 13-14%, so if we are comparing these two, they need to be nearly the exact same sweetness AND ABV. Otherwise, it's apples and oranges. Speaking of, fruit wines would be different, because you have to add sugar up front to get enough abv. So for this comparison, lets just say only grape wines. Does anyone know of a grape wine that can be found as non-backsweetened and backsweetened with the same or very close in both abv and sugar?

As far as filtering, plate filters are nice, but I'm not sure how many wineries use them. They are not cheap, nor work well with smaller batches.


----------



## Minnesotamaker

Is it possible that we just have a question about the definition of "sweetening"? If they think you're talking about adding sugar, it could be that they are not doing that. But isn't it possible that they could split their volume of juice into two parts and ferment the bulk of the juice until it is dry and then stabilize it with sulfite/sorbate and then add a reserve of the original juice which would contain the native unfermented sugars into the finished product. This would give them alcohol and some sweetness without "back sweetening" per se.


----------



## winemaker_3352

Minnesotamaker said:


> Is it possible that we just have a question about the definition of "sweetening"? If they think you're talking about adding sugar, it could be that they are not doing that. But isn't it possible that they could split their volume of juice into two parts and ferment the bulk of the juice until it is dry and then stabilize it with sulfite/sorbate and then add a reserve of the original juice which would contain the native unfermented sugars into the finished product. This would give them alcohol and some sweetness without "back sweetening" per se.



I am not sure if they do that - but that is a great idea...

I might have to try that on a bench trial and see how it turns out.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

_it is possible but why would you do it?
unless you were working with some hybrid cold climate grapes with acid levels above 12g/l .

even then you'd want to make sure your so2 levels are high and lysosyme are added.

but again I have to ask , why would you sweeten an mlf wine? the two are at cross purposes and add risk when done together. 

_

Well it is possible to have a Saingee Rose with levels of Malic that affect the taste. So what is the harm in getting rid of it before you back sweeten whether you use sugar or a reserved juice and then add Sorbate. I think you are focused on stopping the ferment and leaving residual sugar. Which is fine but then in this example you have high malic levels. What is the sense to do it that way if it gets in the way of a MLF and you are left with a sweet yet harsh wine. I guess you have to make that decision early in the game. Personally I think the stopping the ferment is more romantic. But backsweeting to me is much more pragmatic. 

_I am not sure if they do that - but that is a great idea...

I might have to try that on a bench trial and see how it turns out._
__________________

Using a "Sweet Reserve" juice is done all the time especially in finer whites. An amount is frozen at the pressing and kept to be added. It is thought that using a reserve will add not only the sugar but unfermented flavors that cane sugar alone does not have. Adding Sugar or Reserve Juice is still considered backsweetening.
Malvina


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Midwest Vintner said:


> My main thought here is this, does residual sugar taste different than backsweeteing? I think that real sugar, such as cane or beet, tastes very similar. Would that mean that residual sugar is the same? Or is there another process that makes the difference by going dry? The only thing I can think of, is when yeasts die slowly, off flavors can arise. Furthermore, is it possible to get 13-14% abv and be semisweet (1.010+) without adding sugar? I think wine that stays under 12% will typically be better than a wine that is 13-14%, so if we are comparing these two, they need to be nearly the exact same sweetness AND ABV. Otherwise, it's apples and oranges. Speaking of, fruit wines would be different, because you have to add sugar up front to get enough abv. So for this comparison, lets just say only grape wines. Does anyone know of a grape wine that can be found as non-backsweetened and backsweetened with the same or very close in both abv and sugar?
> 
> As far as filtering, plate filters are nice, but I'm not sure how many wineries use them. They are not cheap, nor work well with smaller batches.



Leaving residual sugar and backsweetening can result in different taste results. But you can as you say, add sugar at the beginning of the ferment like you do with fruit wines and then stop the ferment when you have both 13-14 percent ABV and residual sugar. So it is not hard to get a 14 % wine with residual sugar. Now you can water down the Must and create a 12% wine with residual sugar at 12 % I don't see a problem making 2 wines using the same grapes using 2 methods and getting the same ABV. Some experience would help however. 

Plate filters are used extensively by Wineries. But the question is what is a small batch. If you mean they don't work for small batches because of the loss and the cost of the filter media, you can adjust the number of plates to use based on the volume that needs to be filtered.


----------



## altavino

if you were making a rose' and you were using a hybrid or northern grape with really , really high malic levels you might want to drop the malic a bit . I can't see you needing to do that with most vinifera but in a marginal climate you might want to.

if this was the case , I still wouldn't use mlf for a sweet wine. 

nope , I'd use a yeast that would metabolise some of the malic. Maurvin B would be my first choice as it can metabolise up to 55% malic durring primary with no dactyl production. if you wanted 100% malic reduction , and you could get some the GM yeast ML01 would technically be a better option than mlf, if you are ok with GM yeasts. Maurvin is my go to yeast for this and can do a very good ml reduction, while leaving enough bite to balance the high sugar levels. 

With late harvest and icewines , there usually isn't much malic left with grapes that old so you end up adjusting to 8-10 g/l with tartaric to balance the acid/ residule sugar levels. this acid sugar balance is what sweet wine making is all about. no acid and you have sweet flat swill.

back sweetening with sugar is rarely done with vinifera grapes , this is more a hybrid technique to mask what can be sharp acid levels , or used in fruit winemaking.
The exception being german suss reserve wines where as mentioned above some juice is added back post ferment to backsweeten . otherwise crash chilling , filtering or sorbate are used to arrest sweet wines such as sauternernes or icewine, you want to stop the ferment at 9- 10% alcohol or its too hot for the stlye , remember your starting brix is above 30 for these styles of wines. port uses high alcohol additions to arrest the ferment 

When I make an off dry reisling , gewurtztraminer or ortega I use this suss reserve technique . I add it to dry clear and stabilsed wine , and I have added sorbate and sulfite to the reserve before adding to the main wine. 
clarify and filter , let age for a few more weeks to insure a ferment hasn't restarted and bottle.

JE


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Well I look at it this way. You say you would only do it with high malic hybrid or northern grapes.  But if you think about it we not only do MLF for stability in dry wines we also do it to reduce harshness. AND we do it to Central Valley Low Acid Grapes all the time when malic levels don't even reach 250 ppm. So if MLF reduces harshness in a low acid Central Valley Grape by ridding the wine of Malic why the objection to removing it from a Rose made from those grapes. Your logic escapes me. As far as using ML01 good luck getting that. Nice on paper can you show me a source. If we had one many of us would have stopped buying ML Bacteria years ago. As far as Maurvin B it can reduce some Malic but not really eliminate it. 
Malvina


----------



## altavino

Doing mlf on a rose would be outside normal commercial practice (unless dealing with monster acid levels like with upstate NY hybrids, in which case you might also cold stabilise down to -7'C) , as would doing mlf on a sweet wine or any aromatic white (mlf on whites is mostly limited to chardonnay , occassionaly viognier and SB) . lots of sources on this, Pambianachi being one most of us are familiar with.

but doing mlf on a dry red wine , even with low malic cv grapes absolutely would be standard practice in the cv 250ppm case mostly for stability reasons not harshness , but this is about sweet wines , usually white or rose. you never mlf a port either. don't confuse sweetwine making with dry red wine making. 

with low acid cv grapes , how harsh is the wine going to be with less than 4g/l TA and very low levels of malic?? unless you are drinking your white or rose within weeks of primary.

at those levels you're going to have to add acid (tartaric) anyway

using a yeast like maurvin b would convert about 40% of the malic and still leave some for crisp freshness , surlie aging or adding biolees would further smooth out the wine and be compatable with sweetening.

with sweet wines , an acid backbone is as important as sweetness , they need to be in balance.

with sweet wines made from vinifera grown in a normal climate (and total acid levels in the 5-7 g/l range) , you don't do anything to reduce malic acid, mlf would only be for extream high acid cases (12 or more g/l) in a sweet wine. even then I'd try the combo of maurvin B and cold stabilisation first.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

I understand your reasoning but I disagree that low levels of malic are not affecting taste or harshness. Also I have no problem adding tartaric to restore the backbone. I also think that there is a big difference between sweet wines and slightly sweet Rose. In the case of slightly sweet Saingee's the Malic is probably more apparent. I can also see that you see no need to reduce Malic in Sweet wines but what I do not understand is the problem you have with doing a mlf and restoring acid levels with more friendly tartaric. I just don't see the harm in that.


----------



## altavino

No worries , the thread was about making wine like the pros do.

Mlf is almost never done commercially on rose or any sweet or off dry vinifera wines , period.
Buttery flavors , potential VA and the general desire to keep a wine crisp and clean without manipulation are the main drivers. 

For that matter mlf is not usually done on white wines either , it would be the exception not the rule (ie Chardonnay) 
And a rose is generally handled like a white wine . 

This is general practice , in making white , rose or sweet wines. 
Where as full mlf is standard practice with dry red vinifera wines

Your unusual choice to do mlf on a rose', is, like most things in winemaking, a choice , but it is not common or even reccomended practice in rose' winemaking . 

Chacun a son gout , to each their own .


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Yes you are correct about something I overlooked completely. Buttery Flavors! And you are correct about Whites for sure. This past season I made a Saingee GSM Rose and I was worried when I did not mlf it. When I bottled it the finish was a tad harsh. I was kicking myself for not doing the mlf. In the bottle for 2 months that harshness in the finish has diminished where I think in a few months it will be a fine example of a Rhone Rose. I did not reserve juice for this, my focus was taken up on the primary wine. I did use sugar. My other problem was color. I took the saignee off a little too fast and I was left with a Rose that was too light. I had the primary wine I could have added for color but that had undergone mlf and I was afraid to use it . I considered Lysozyme but decided no. I did absolute filter with .20 so I didn't use Sorbate either. For the color I wanted that Rhone Color not the Blush Zinfandel Color. I did achieve it but resorted to another fix I rather not say. LOL I am thinking I spent more time and worry about the saignee then I did the primary wine which amounted to a half ton crush. Live and learn!
Malvina


----------



## altavino

A wine harsh after only 2 months in the bottle? Go figure!

You need patience not mlf. Bottle shock would also make the acid seem shaper as the fruit is muted after bottling.

Mlf would also potentialy lighten the rose colour . Yet another reason it isn't standard practice.

You have an absolute filter at home That can do .20 ? Wow ! that must have cost a pretty penny. I've never even heard of a home filter set up that could do absolute. Best most of us can do is .45 with a enolmatic tandem


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Yes Even Malvina gets impatient at times. I think the reason in this case is bottling so soon as opposed to usual reds I make which spend some time in tanks and then in barrels usually a 2 year process before bottling. I think I am not accustomed to that time frame for tasting a Rose. Nice Conversation Altavino. 
Malvina 
Patience such a wonderful inexpensive ingredient which is so hard to use.


----------



## altavino

That's cool Malvina,

Enjoy your rose , 

John


----------



## Midwest Vintner

Yes, I would agree that time will make wine better than if you are fining, filtering or mlf. It is just the natural way, which is less dramatic. The problem with many wines that may be great, but end up good is mostly due to the fact that people buy wine, then drink it in the next few days. A .20 micron seems like it might be too small, but I guess it does eliminate the use of sorbate, which isn't a bad thing. With a good balance, care and maybe just a little gas filler, you might be able to get away with years of aging without even any sulphites. 

A problem with my commercial wines was that we were too quick to bottle, so it didn't get much bulk aging and then started selling a few months later. I hate doing it, because we made the wine to get a little age (fruit wines typically get better for 1-4 yrs). Still, they aren't too shabby, but not as good as the stuff we've cellared from years past doing home wine making. Still getting the hang of making 100+ gal batch minimums. We are now trying to get ahead, but it's starting to sell.....


----------



## downunder

Just read the whole thread from start to finish.....very interesting. For the members who were saying cooling jackets on tanks were a slow way of chilling wine.. you are right.. that's why heat exchangers are used. and huge ones. The last winery I worked at had tanks that held 1.5 million litres of wine. To chill the wine as it went into the tank start temp may be say 20 temp in tank minus 4 takes huge amounts of power to do that.
Was interested in the comments that wineries in the US add sugar... Any winery here found doing that here would be shut down pronto. Here concentrated grape juice is added. And Sorbate is never used commercially. Does this sometimes cause problems? only know of one case were literally thousands upon thousands of bottles of wine started re-fermenting......was a disaster.........only happened because the bottling crew did not follow operating procedures.
To sterile bottle at home..pretty hard.... I use alcohol instead of chemical methods..bit hard to hold all the equipment at 80c for 20 mins......most of it would melt.
More later


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Chaptalization is not legal in California so concentrates are used instead. Other states may allow the use of Sugar. You don't mention where you are from. Sorry "down Under" I get it Duh!
Malvina


----------



## altavino

cross flow filtration is the fastest way to sterile filter (20x as fast as plate filtering) , and is often combined with heat exchanger cooling .

so if you have 25000 litres of icewine you need to arrest a ferment on , you back up the cross flow trailer to your tank and away you go.

In Niagra there are mobile companies who provide this service specifically for ice wine.


----------



## Midwest Vintner

We have a sterile filter, but haven't used it. lol. I may try using a few different filters, bottle and open down the road. Sounds like a year or more experiment to see the actual results though. 

Using concentrate can get you in trouble with the ATF if you are a bonded winery. Maybe state regulated wineries can do that? Juice is fine, but concentrates need approvals and must be on labels.

25000 liters???? lol. I'm working with ~400-1000 or 100-300 gallons for US folks.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

What do you think is the least expensive cross flow filtration setup you can put together? 
Malvina


----------



## altavino

I think they start at about 50K for a basic one.

I know that here in Oliver and Up in Kelowna there are guys who have them mounted on trailers and you book them to come to your winery , usually close to finaly bottleing as opposed to using it to arrest a ferment.
the same thing is available in Washington and down in California. Often these companies also have mobile bottleing lines. 

a quick google even finds one on the east coast
http://macrossflow.com/contact.htm



JE


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Thanks for the info. I am afraid a little too big for Malvina's operation. But I am sourcing some absolute level cartridges from Critical Process. They seem to be on top of this as manufacturers.
Malvina


----------



## altavino

If you find some could you post the model number of the cartridge? 
What sort of housing? 

I currently use two enolmatic tandems in a row with a 2 and a .45 micron cartridge in series


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

I have a call in to them and they are getting back to me. I specified them for the Tenco Housing (enolmatic) I want the .20s to be absolute. I am not worried about the 1.0s and the .45 to be absolute. The representative did indicate the glass filter media was much better than the standard Polypropylene and only a few dollars more. The Polyethersulfone Media are absolute. We will see what he says tomorrow on pricing.
Malvina


----------



## Runningwolf

I am currently using a .2 filter for my apple wines with the enolmatic. I do not believe it is absolute. I normally use the .45 for everything but last year I had one bottle of apple blow a cork so I'm experimenting with the .2 this year. After doing some research it seems like apple can be notorius for this. I was just surprised only one bottle out of 60 decided to start a referment. The wine was fully stabilized. Any comments are appreciated. The .2 filters can be purchased at Presque Isle for about $50.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Runningwolf said:


> I am currently using a .2 filter for my apple wines with the enolmatic. I do not believe it is absolute. I normally use the .45 for everything but last year I had one bottle of apple blow a cork so I'm experimenting with the .2 this year. After doing some research it seems like apple can be notorius for this. I was just surprised only one bottle out of 60 decided to start a referment. The wine was fully stabilized. Any comments are appreciated. The .2 filters can be purchased at Presque Isle for about $50.


I do not believe the Presque Isle filter Cartridges are absolute. They have to be made of Polyethersulfone. Here is a description of one. VPS grade cartridges are validated using modified HIMA protocols at a challenge level of 106 organisms per cm² of filter media. (0.22 μm challenged with Brevundimonas diminuta)
(0.45 μm challenged with Serratia marscecens) (0.65 μm
challenged with Saccharomyces cerevisiae).

Here is a description of a polypropylene type that is not absolute. FPD cartridges are rated at 99.9% efficiencies at the rated pore
size and are designed to give maximum throughput because of
our unique gradient density construction. This design facilitates
cartridge cleaning.

The absolute variety look to be about 3 times the price. By the way bacteria will pass through a .45 while yeast will not. So your problem could have been bacteria and not yeast. I would not be surprised about apple as the majority acid is Malic. And ML bacteria are everywhere in a winery. Lysozyme may be the answer for better protection. 
Malvina


----------



## Runningwolf

Thanks Malvina, as I was quite sure they were not based on the price. Great tip on the Lysozyme, thank you.


----------



## Midwest Vintner

I am running a PEP (>95%) and have a PES (>99%), but not used it, yet. Will be doing experiments on the next batches. I would think that at less a micron, you will be losing both color and flavor. For home wine making, I could not see going under .45.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Midwest Vintner said:


> I am running a PEP (>95%) and have a PES (>99%), but not used it, yet. Will be doing experiments on the next batches. I would think that at less a micron, you will be losing both color and flavor. For home wine making, I could not see going under .45.



Please let us not have that argument about color and flavor. Home winemaking why the distinction? This is after all "Making wine like a Winery" They don't sterile filter whites in a winery to lose color and flavor. If you want to eliminate bacteria then .45 will not do it. So what choice does a winery have but to use a filter in the .2-3 range. 
Malvina


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Here is the information regarding the Critical Process Filter Cartridges for the Enolmatic Tenco Filter Housing.
all filters are 10 inch 2-226 O Ring Size Silicone O rings Flat Bottom 

1 Micron Polyproplene 99 percent effective FPD1-0N00001S6 
1 Micron Fiberglass 99 percent effective better through-put, easier cleaning FGD1-0N00001S6
.45 Micron Fiberglass 99 percent effective " " " FGD4-0N00001S6 
.22 Micron PES Absolute VPS2-0N00001S6

Malvina


----------



## Runningwolf

Malvina great info. Do you have a preferred place for buying these filters? I tried to google some info but did not come up with anything.


----------



## MalvinaScordaad

Directly from Critical Process Filtration Speak to Brent. His father owns the Company. They are the manufacturers. I won't publish the prices but I can tell you that *no one* has better prices for these filters. Just use the numbers I posted or go to the web site and you can figure out the code for the filter you want. For the Enolmatic the key items are 10 inch length no SS ring, silicone O ring 0-226 O ring size flat bottom. With that done you can call and get a price. He is a nice fellow and as of now willing to work with small buyers. But lets not abuse the situation, it helps if you are prepared for what you want when you call. We don't want to get pushed off onto some distributor with much higher prices if we annoying. 
Malvina


----------



## Runningwolf

Thanks for the follow up and info. I understand what you're saying.


----------

