# High Ph after MLF



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 18, 2019)

I have just finished MLF last week with 95 gallons of Petit Sirah. I used Chris Hansen Viniflora Oenos ML bacteria as always. I have 80 gallons in a Flex tank and the rest in 2 carboys. Determined MLF finish through Chromatology testing. 

I measured Ph and it has risen from 3.63 pre Alcoholic fermentation to 4.0 Ph post MLF. I measured SO2 with a Hanna 84100 mini titrator Yesterday Free SO2 was 30 ppm today it was 27 ppm. 

Should I rack and sulfite to 50 ppm or 55 ppm or should I add tartaric acid and bring Ph down first. 

Prior to Must fermentation the Ph was 3.9 but the Brix was not high as it was under 24.9. Therefore, instead of acidulated water I just mixed Tartaric acid with small amounts of water and brought the Ph down to 3.63. 

I have never had a high Ph post MLF only pre fermentation of the must and always adjusted accordingly to lower Ph successfully. 

Appreciate any ideas
Jeff Sparagana


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 18, 2019)

TA was 7.0 post MLF


----------



## NorCal (Dec 18, 2019)

I’ve had plenty of wines that bounce back to their original pH. My best suggestion is to put the meter in the drawer and do acid addition bench trials to taste. My experience is that by the time you adjust the acid where the numbers look good, the wine will not be drinkable. If you adjust to taste, then you can take out the meter and know where you are for SO2 addition.

I’d rack first and do the acid addition. I’m not sure you will move the pH meter much. With a 3.9+ I’d shoot for SO2 levels closer to 90-100. Bottle it within a year and drink it before 5.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 18, 2019)

I will rack and do a next trial. Was expecting to add TA. I thought the closer to 100+ ppm the better chance it have a sulfite taste. 

Would love for the PH to come down naturally. I have never had a wine increase from 3.6 to 4.0 in MLF. Will also add some oak staves. Usually bottle in a year. Any other thoughts are welcome.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 18, 2019)

When I rack would it help to give it a shot of SO2 to raise the sulfite level from 27 ppm to say 60 ppm? Then I can do the bench trials and not be worried about the wine. 

Jeff


----------



## Johnd (Dec 18, 2019)

I think the exact same thing as @NorCal after dealing with high pH grapes / wines for years. Just forget about the target numbers now, with a TA of 7.0, you could do damage to the taste pretty quickly shooting for a pH. If you determine through bench trials that your wine is best right where it is, then just manage the SO2 properly. If you don't have the red wine pH / free sulfite chart, here are the values near your current pH, at pH 4.0, your target sulfite level should be 80 ppm, pH 3.9 is about 65ppm, pH 3.8 is 50ppm, and pH 3.7 is 40ppm. I have quite a few higher pH wines that are almost 4 and doing just fine so far.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 18, 2019)

Thanks for the input. Make sense to me. I have had wines at 3.8 and managed the PH properly and they were fine. I was concerned about this one because 4.0 after MLF is new territory. 

Jefg


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 18, 2019)

Jeff, Norcal's recommendation of 100 ppm shouldn't hurt anything since in a years time a lot of it will become bound. It may temporarily bleach it a little but the color should come back. I often over sulfite my wines with the first addition, maybe not to 100 ppm but definately more than the recommended amounts. Johnd's numbers appear to be right on if you wanted to go that route.


----------



## NorCal (Dec 18, 2019)

mainshipfred said:


> Jeff, Norcal's recommendation of 100 ppm shouldn't hurt anything since in a years time a lot of it will become bound. It may temporarily bleach it a little but the color should come back. I often over sulfite my wines with the first addition, maybe not to 100 ppm but definately more than the recommended amounts. Johnd's numbers appear to be right on if you wanted to go that route.


I am aggressive on the sulfite up-front and stay close to the book, since a higher percentage of the SO2 gets immediately bound up and will taper down closer to 50 ppm, regardless of pH when it comes close to bottling. Right or wrong, it's worked for me and I work exclusively with this pH range.


----------



## Johnd (Dec 18, 2019)

Just to give you a little of the perspective I used to get comfy with high pH wines, consider the following wine, 2016 Bell Longtable, and the WA evaluation of the wine. Look closely at the harvest acid and final acid at .49 and .63, respectively. The pH of the finished wine is 3.96. I suspect that an aggressive acid addition was made up front, it rebounded some, and adjusted to taste later in the game, and the pH is allowed to be what it is. The wine was successfully aged in barrels for 21 months without problems......good sulfite management, no doubt. 

Now look at the WA evaluation, rated 94+, a very respectable wine that you don’t start drinking for 3 years, and has a drinking life of 17 years. 

There are MANY CA wines that look like this, if you can get the info. I’m not suggesting that we can make higher pH 94+ wines that last 20 years with the fruit we have reasonable access to, but I am of the firm belief that we can make good high pH wines with decent shelf life, it just requires a little extra attention. Just one winemakers opinion.


----------



## jgmillr1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Johnd said:


> There are MANY CA wines that look like this, if you can get the info. I’m not suggesting that we can make higher pH 94+ wines that last 20 years with the fruit we have reasonable access to, but I am of the firm belief that we can make good high pH wines with decent shelf life



I'd also bet that these high pH commercial wines have been sterile filtered at bottling. So, the risks of high pH wines are lower for the commercial wineries than the home brewer that doesn't have the same toys.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

These grapes are from Paso Robles in California. Thanks for your thoughts. I have had wines at 3.8 that were terrific. I did provide appropriate sulfite management. I plan rack and sulfite to 55 ppm today and then wait a week and test SO2 and Ph then determine what And if will do with something with TA. I did add TA prior to fermentation to reduce PH to 3.6. I am not intimidated by high Ph just want to be careful. Many thanks for the input more is welcomed. Will keep you posted.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

Will also add 5 medium toast American oak planks to the 80 gallon flex tank and the carboys. 
Jeff


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 19, 2019)

Jeff Sparagana said:


> These grapes are from Paso Robles in California. Thanks for your thoughts. I have had wines at 3.8 that were terrific. I did provide appropriate sulfite management. I plan rack and sulfite to 55 ppm today and then wait a week and test SO2 and Ph then determine what And if will do with something with TA. I did add TA prior to fermentation to reduce PH to 3.6. I am not intimidated by high Ph just want to be careful. Many thanks for the input more is welcomed. Will keep you posted.



You are basically reading straight from my notes on my 2018 Paso Robles cab. 
High ph. Adjusted pre-ferment. Crept back up after mlf. Around 3.9ph now 1yr+ still in bulk. 
Never adjusted post ferment simply because it’s ideal taste as is. IMO added tartaric lessened the quality after a couple test trials. And a portion of it is still in a barrel. As we know- those so2 charts exist for a reason. Trying to get away with less can teach hard lessons. 

One thing I did notice however was that early on the sucker would run through so2 like crazy. I remember I had it at 77ppm. Then Couple months later was down to 35ppm. But that has since stopped and it’s been holding the so2ppm much better now. 
I’m curious what so2ppm those commercial guys are allowed to get away with and what else they do for protection


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

So based upon your experience you would go with the appropriate sulfite level today and keep an eye on it rather then worry about adding acid and effecting the flavor in a negative way. I do agree. Will sulfite for 4.0 ph unless flavor is in need of acid. If flavor is good I will not hold back on the appropriate sulfite addition and hold on any acid addition. 
Jeff


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

Do you have any sulfite odor or flavor to the Cab!


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 19, 2019)

350 stuck in my mind but that is only in the US. I can only imagine these numbers are total not free.

In Europe legal limits for Red wines: 160mg/L, White/Rose wines: 210mg/L and Sweet wines: 400mg/L, US legal limits: 350mg/L and Australia 250mg/L. Naturally occurring levels of SO2 in wines are usually found around 10-20mg/L. All wines containing sulphites greater than 10mg/L must have a statement added to the label making the consumer aware that sulphite in present.


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 19, 2019)

Just found this article from Purdue University concerning the alcohol content and SO2 levels. I never knew the .6 and .8 ppm had to do with alcohol content. I always used it as a red and a white but it makes sense since whites are generally lower in alcohol than reds.


----------



## Johnd (Dec 19, 2019)

jgmillr1 said:


> I'd also bet that these high pH commercial wines have been sterile filtered at bottling. So, the risks of high pH wines are lower for the commercial wineries than the home brewer that doesn't have the same toys.


 
Could very well be............


----------



## stickman (Dec 19, 2019)

I'll be the first to agree that if you have experience with a procedure that works, stay with it. However, the information on SO2 has been changing throughout the years, there's a lot of conflicting information out there. An article from 2012 indicates that the old charts shouldn't be applied to high pH wine, Ive included pieces from the original article below.

Sulfur Dioxide Basics Revisited March 2012 by Clark Smith

Thirty-two years ago my first published piece, printed in the inaugural issues of the University of California, Davis, Extension’s Enology Briefs,1,2 concerned the basics of conventional SO2 management. A table I worked out with pencil and paper in a Shields Library basement can still be found tacked up on winery lab walls throughout the United States. There are omissions I have since regretted, and it is high time for a rewrite.

The most important omission in my 1980 article was to point out the folly of applying the table to high-pH wines. If your wine is pH 4.0, you want to correct the pH, not try to stabilize its microbiology by maintaining 120 ppm FSO2. This applies to winemaking above 3.6, the peak of the bitartrate curve, which constitutes a natural watershed dividing winemaking into low- and high-pH regions. High-pH winemaking concerns itself mostly with red wines, which have more vigorous anti-oxidative phenolic reactions in this zone and greater maturation requirements.

The dominant theme of low-pH winemaking is focused on prevention and control. In high-pH winemaking, we often acknowledge that we have given up on prevention and try instead to direct the inevitable to a stable and agreeable outcome in which a microbial balance is sought rather than a draconian elimination strategy.

In low-pH winemaking, we stress the role of molecular sulfur dioxide to control the growth of microorganisms. Since its effectiveness as an inhibitor is greatly lessened at high pH, it is more sensible to forget about molecular SO2 in this zone and instead regulate free SO2 (FSO2).

Free SO2, which is substantially all bisulfite, should be maintained to combine with H2O2 as it is formed as a side product of chemical oxidation of diphenols. The reaction of sulfites and peroxide is the fastest reaction known to chemistry, and it may be relied upon to prevent the formation of aldehyde from ethanol oxidation. Since SO2 is depleted by this action and by aldehyde binding, it must be measured by aeration/oxidation and maintained at a reasonable level (20-30 ppm) throughout aging. Total SO2 should be measured to assess flavor impact (a soapy finish can be detected at about 200 ppm) and because of its inhibitory effect on malolactic bacteria at about 100 ppm.

A desirable consequence of sulfite oxidation to sulfuric acid is the liberation of free acidity. Over time, very high-pH wines tend to experience decreased pH and slightly increased TA. This effect can be ignored below pH 3.6 but can, during extended barrel age at pH 3.9, result in an increase of around 0.5 g/L in TA and a reduction of 0.1 in pH. Thus wines with sufficient reactive diphenol concentration can begin aging with unbalanced acidity (e.g. pH = 3.9, TA = 4.5) and finish on target (pH = 3.85, TA = 5.0).

The low-pH realm may be compared to in-town driving, where controlled navigation is paramount and little distance needs to be covered. We drive in town at 20 to 40 mph, corresponding to 3.2-3.4 pH. Maturing red wines more resemble freeway driving, in which there is less fragility and a greater imperative to traverse distance. The speeds with which we are comfortable on a divided highway are in the range of 55-75 mph, corresponding to pH 3.7-3.85. I must insist here that higher pHs are irresponsible. Wines at pH 4.0 are comparable to driving at 100 mph: demonstrably unsafe regardless of conditions.


----------



## sour_grapes (Dec 19, 2019)

Thanks, Stick! That was very interesting.


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 19, 2019)

“SO2 requirements
If the winemaker decides not to follow the charts above, he or she might just as well not add any SO2 at all, as it will not make much difference”

No sugarcoating it! Lol. Interesting to see the difference of opinion from as recently as 2012 in Stickmans post compared to now regarding high ph wines in the Purdue study. 
I never realized that about the molecular levels/abv correlation either Fred. 

I’m doin 95mph on the freeway with the top down and music blasting. Hope I don’t regret it! [emoji51]



Jeff Sparagana said:


> Do you have any sulfite odor or flavor to the Cab!



Nope. Not as far as I could ever tell. I keep the cab in the barrel a little higher too. I’ll be blending all back together as well as adding maybe 10% of another wine (which has a 3.2 ph) before bottling soon. Im optimistic. After blending I should have about 10 cases of the wine so I sure hope it lasts more than 5 yrs!
Time will tell (abv is about 14% iirc)
So just like you said, first gotta decide if it stays or if can benefit from an adjustment. I just personally hate adjusting later. The couple times I did everything seemed fine at the time, but whether it was my taste buds that changed or the adjustments were accentuated with age, I ended up regretting it.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

For sure. Looks like I am doing the same. Will probably do in the range of 80 ppm and hope for the best. This is a batch of straight Petit Sirah. Nothing to blend.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

Will check SO2 level in a week.


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 19, 2019)

Who knows. Maybe you’ll luck out after testing a couple samples and find that a touch of tartaric improves it while dropping ph a click
This is by far what I dislike most about Cali grapes. The wines can be so high maintenance. And I notice the wines surfaces are much more prone to get “dirty” on my high ph wines as well.


----------



## stickman (Dec 19, 2019)

What's interesting is that we already know from our own experience, that ML bacteria can be inhibited by some forms of bound so2, so the comment that "If the winemaker decides not to follow the charts above, he or she might just as well not add any SO2 at all", is not entirely accurate.

Another point in the Clark Smith article is noted below,
"Pigment-bound forms (of so2) differ from the aldehyde bisulfite complex (ABC) in that they are in rapid equilibrium with free SO2, and although they are included in FSO2 analysis as true free SO2, this is not actually the case. While these forms also inhibit malolactic fermentation as if they were free, they do not inhibit oxidative conversion by acetobacter of ethanol to acetic acid.5 Suppression of vinegar bacteria in red wine is entirely dependent on reductive strength."

So the point above is, even when maintaining a measured free so2 to achieve a proper molecular so2, that this is still ineffective for inhibiting acetobacter, they remain active in the wine and will be in competition with the wine for any oxygen that is provided, wine that has the ability to consume oxygen faster than the bacteria will have lower VA. Along these lines for example, oxygen being fed through a barrel is slow enough that the wine typically consumes it faster than it enters, dissolved oxygen concentration in the wine remains at or near 0 preventing acetobacter (always present) from thriving and generating VA, the point again is that it's not the so2 that's protecting the wine from acetobacter.


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 19, 2019)

stickman said:


> What's interesting is that we already know from our own experience, that ML bacteria can be inhibited by some forms of bound so2, so the comment that "If the winemaker decides not to follow the charts above, he or she might just as well not add any SO2 at all", is not entirely accurate.
> 
> Another point in the Clark Smith article is noted below,
> "Pigment-bound forms (of so2) differ from the aldehyde bisulfite complex (ABC) in that they are in rapid equilibrium with free SO2, and although they are included in FSO2 analysis as true free SO2, this is not actually the case. While these forms also inhibit malolactic fermentation as if they were free, they do not inhibit oxidative conversion by acetobacter of ethanol to acetic acid.5 Suppression of vinegar bacteria in red wine is entirely dependent on reductive strength."
> ...



OK, read it and reread it several times. The last part of the last sentence says "it's not the SO2 that's protecting the wine". Is this referring to acetobacter only or the wine in general?


----------



## stickman (Dec 19, 2019)

Acetobacter


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 19, 2019)

Just racked. The wine tasted somewhat acidic probably from the pre fermentation acid addition to bring down PH. Raised SO2 to 80 ppm during racking. I also added 4 American oak Nadalie oak planks. 

The wine is not Tannic and has a soft mouthfeel and beautiful color. I am hopeful the acid will relax over time with aging. Will test SO2 in a week to determine where it’s at. 
Thanks all any feedback is welcome. 
Jeff


----------



## sour_grapes (Dec 19, 2019)

Ooooh, perhaps I will take a stroll to the basement and add my ~3 mos. dose of k-meta to my high-_p_H Syrah from grapes... No, no reason, just thinking it may be time... 
 YIKES!


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 20, 2019)

Any thoughts on how to lower the acid level would be appreciated. 
Jeff


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 20, 2019)

Jeff Sparagana said:


> Any thoughts on how to lower the acid level would be appreciated.
> Jeff



Well I’m no Joe Pro Winemaker so maybe some of the more chemistry knowledgeable members can offer more insight, but again, this is similar to my 2018 Paso grapes. 
High ph. Wanted to lower it but adding acid did not improve the wine. And if anything needed LESS. But already high ph so zero wiggle room. 
What I ended up doing was allowing it to naturally fall out with the lower winter temps. Not even cold stabilizing, just a couple months <60° in the basement. So whether it was temps or age or both, it fell into place nicely.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 20, 2019)

That is great news. Can’t get my wine room down to 60 but I can pipe in cool air. 

Just a bit more info. I reduced ph pre fermentation with tartaric acid. Usually I use acidulated water but the Brix was 23.5 and not above 24.1 so I did not use the acidulated water just TA with a small amount of water. Only used about 1/4 of what the calculation called for and moved ph from 3.9 to 3.6. 

now post MLF it is quite acidic. Go figure. 
See chromatology test results. Only the middle carboy in the middle on the right may not be finished yet. Need to reduce the acid. 
What should I do next. 
Thanks


----------



## cmason1957 (Dec 20, 2019)

Jeff Sparagana said:


> Only the middle carboy in the middle on the right may not be finished yet. Need to reduce the acid.
> What should I do next.
> Thanks



My advice, throw out the PH meter (well not completely) and tell me how it tastes. The numbers aren't the be all and end all of wine taste. I have tasted wines that had a PH of 3.2 TA of 1 and somehow they tasted flabby and like they needed more acid, as well as wines that had a ph of 4 and ta of .4 that were amazing. For me the numbers are important before fermentation, after taste is the be all and end all (and the numbers guide you on how much SO2 to have).


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 20, 2019)

Jeff Sparagana said:


> What should I do next.
> Thanks



My basement isn’t finished but it is heated. All I do is close the heat registers and allow the room to stay cool. Usually it’s right around 60° in the winter with some colder spells. Always end up with at least some sparkling sediment crystals. That plus another 6-8 months definitely let the wine dial in naturally. 
I agree with @cmason1957 here. I would let it go and evaluate later on. The only decision now would be how to handle the demi that hasn’t finished mlf. Which is only about 15% of the total vol


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 20, 2019)

My concern now is taste. Need to lower the acid. Will try naturally as I have time. Will not bottle til next November. Will cool my wine room and let it roll naturally for a while.
If sulfite the unfinished demjon MLF will stop. 
Thanks for all the support.​


----------



## stickman (Dec 20, 2019)

What happened to the rose that was pulled from this batch, did the pH hold in the rose? Pre-fermentation pH adjustment can be tricky, it usually takes a couple of days on the skins for the pH to stabilize. I'm not that familiar with Paso Robles grapes, though I hear they retain more acidity than many of the warmer growing regions. As the others have pointed out, time is needed to allow the co2 to blow off and the tartrates to drop, until then you'll be tasting more acid than what will remain in the finished wine.


----------



## Jeff Sparagana (Dec 20, 2019)

The Rose also has high ph but tastes excellent. I fermented it separately. 
I was hoping for 25 gallons of finished wine but did not get that much lots of sediment and leas with these grapes. First time I have used Paso Robles. 
I have cool air blowing into my wine room from outside. Usually is around 70 degrees should get down to the low 60’s as it is cold outside here in PA. Today about 28 degrees. 
Thanks for the help all
Jeff


----------



## Mario Dinis (Dec 20, 2019)

Johnd said:


> I think the exact same thing as @NorCal after dealing with high pH grapes / wines for years. Just forget about the target numbers now, with a TA of 7.0, you could do damage to the taste pretty quickly shooting for a pH. If you determine through bench trials that your wine is best right where it is, then just manage the SO2 properly. If you don't have the red wine pH / free sulfite chart, here are the values near your current pH, at pH 4.0, your target sulfite level should be 80 ppm, pH 3.9 is about 65ppm, pH 3.8 is 50ppm, and pH 3.7 is 40ppm. I have quite a few higher pH wines that are almost 4 and doing just fine so far.


What about pH 3.44, what's the ideal SO2 level?


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 20, 2019)

Mario Dinis said:


> What about pH 3.44, what's the ideal SO2 level?



Here are 2 different charts that measure about the same.


----------



## stickman (Dec 20, 2019)

For the numbers people, here is a sample of some Paso wines and their stats, note that some of these wines have significant residual sugar probably to balance acidity, also probably sterile filtered.

A cab with 7.3 g/l residual sugar? I guess not all that surprising, but wow.

Many of these are also award winning wines.

Vintage 2016
Varietal Petite Sirah
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date October 2016
Acid 6.30 g/L
pH 3.55
Bottling Date March 2019
Residual Sugar 3.00 g/L
Alcohol % 14.7

Vintage 2012
Varietal Cabernet Sauvignon
Appellation Paso Robles
pH 3.7
Bottling Date October 2014
Residual Sugar 7.30 g/L
Alcohol % 14.1

Vintage 2017
Varietal Malbec
Appellation Paso Robles
pH 3.8
Acid 5.8 g/l
Bottling Date April 2019
Residual Sugar 1.9 g/L
Alcohol % 14.7

Vintage 2016
Varietal Syrah/Viognier
Appellation Paso Robles
pH 3.77
Acid 5.9 g/l
Bottling Date April 2019
Residual Sugar 5.0 g/L
Alcohol % 13.6

Vintage 2016
Varietal Cabernet Sauvignon
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date September 2016
Acid 6.60 g/L
pH 3.55
Bottling Date September 2018
Residual Sugar 5.00 g/L
Alcohol % 14.9
Wine Enthusiast 93, DOUBLE GOLD - San Francisco Chronicle Wine Competition • GOLD - San Francisco International Wine Competition

Vintage 2015
Varietal Merlot
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date September 2015
Acid 6.70 g/L
pH 3.49
Bottling Date March 2018
Residual Sugar 3.00 g/L
Alcohol % 14.5
Gold – Denver International Wine Competition Awards

Vintage 2015
Varietal Cabernet Sauvignon
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date October 2015
Acid 6.20 g/L
pH 3.59
Bottling Date March 2018
Residual Sugar 2.70 g/L
Alcohol % 13.5

Release 2016
Varietal Cabernet Sauvignon
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date October 2012
Acid 6.6g/L
pH 3.73
Bottling Date June 2015
Residual Sugar 6.4g/L
Alcohol % 14.6
PLATINUM + 94 Points – Somm Challenge: Int.
Denver International Wine Competition • DOUBLE GOLD - Indy International Wine Competition • GOLD + 91 Points - Central Coast Wine Competition • GOLD + 90 Points - San Francisco International Wine Competition • 92 Points - Vinous

Vintage 2012
Varietal Petit Verdot
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date November 2012
Acid 6.3g/L
pH 3.69
Bottling Date July 2016
Residual Sugar 2.6g/L
Alcohol % 14.3

Vintage 2013
Varietal Merlot
Appellation Paso Robles
Harvest Date October 2013
Acid 6.3g/L
pH 3.41
Bottling Date December 2015
Residual Sugar 6.9g/L
Alcohol % 14.5
International Wine Competition • GOLD + 91pts San Diego International Wine and Spirits Challenge


----------



## mainshipfred (Dec 20, 2019)

From what I remember 4 g/L and below is usually considered dry. The acid levels don't seem terribly high so my guess might be to offset the higher alcohol content. I would imagine it depends on who they are marketing. I think the general public prefer a sweeter or off dry wine.


----------



## CDrew (Dec 20, 2019)

mainshipfred said:


> From what I remember 4 g/L and below is usually considered dry. The acid levels don't seem terribly high so my guess might be to offset the higher alcohol content. I would imagine it depends on who they are marketing. I think the general public prefer a sweeter or off dry wine.



I just looked this up because of an analysis I had done, and Pambianchi says dry is under 2g/L. I have heard that younger wine drinkers prefer sweeter wines and many wine makers are giving the people what they want. Some of those numbers quoted in post #41 look suspiciously high.


----------



## montanarick (Dec 21, 2019)

Ajmassa said:


> “SO2 requirements
> If the winemaker decides not to follow the charts above, he or she might just as well not add any SO2 at all, as it will not make much difference”
> 
> No sugarcoating it! Lol. Interesting to see the difference of opinion from as recently as 2012 in Stickmans post compared to now regarding high ph wines in the Purdue study.
> ...


would you mind sharing where these charts came from? thanks


----------



## Ajmassa (Dec 21, 2019)

montanarick said:


> would you mind sharing where these charts came from? thanks



Was included in the article Posted earlier in this thread. The Purdue study of high ph/so2. Post #18


----------



## Mario Dinis (Dec 23, 2019)

mainshipfred said:


> Here are 2 different charts that measure about the same.View attachment 57908


Thank you for the file. I will keep it for future reference.


----------



## montanarick (Dec 24, 2019)

Ajmassa said:


> Was included in the article Posted earlier in this thread. The Purdue study of high ph/so2. Post #18


Okay, I've got it thanks. Charts appear to have been generated by some software application where you could input molecular SO2 and alcohol content to come up with free SO2 at various pH's. I though maybe you had a source for the software.


----------



## stickman (Dec 24, 2019)

Deleted, wrong post.


----------

