# Whole grape port



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

I use Pearson's square to determine the "point of fortification" (or at what brix reading in which I want to add my fortifier). 

At the "point of fortification", I would always take the appropriate amount of free run juice off of the sins and add my fortifier to it. It has turned out fantastic.

Last year, I tried something a bit different. Instead of simply steeling some free run juice off the skins and then adding my fortifier, I made a small side batch of wine just for use in port. At the "point of fortification", I added my fortifier to the must and allowed the port to sit on the skins for several more days. 

All I can say is WOW, what a difference! This year's port is perhaps the best I ever made. 

Does anybody else make port for fresh fruit? If so, do you continue to macerate after the point of fortification?


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 28, 2014)

So you are suggesting that adding the fortifier into the must while the skins or fruit is still in the must makes a significant difference in flavour? If so, this sounds like something I might want to try.


----------



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

Seth, 

That I exactly what I am saying. Maceration with the fortifier seemed to bring out more of the body of the wine. 

This is how it worked out last year and I only have one trial using this method. I am not sure if the quality of the port is due to the particular year or is it truly due to allowing a higher alcohol contact with the skins. 

This is why I am asking if anyone else has had similar results.


----------



## ibglowin (Mar 28, 2014)

Ethanol extraction!


----------



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

ibglowin said:


> Ethanol extraction!


 





.....Yes.... Master........


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 28, 2014)

Ha, well it seems like it would make sense. I wonder if it would also give you more grape seed tannins.


----------



## ibglowin (Mar 28, 2014)

Bawhahahahahahahahahaha....... 

Your already giving up your secrets! Its working! 



JohnT said:


> .....Yes.... Master........


----------



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Ha, well it seems like it would make sense. I wonder if it would also give you more grape seed tannins.


 

I would think that this would make the port more bitter, but I found the results to be much the opposite. 

I think that I will make 2 batches next year and compare the two.


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 28, 2014)

Not a bad idea. One thing that might also help the bitterness is the fact that most ports are atleast somewhat sweet thus the bitter can be balanced out with ease.


----------



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Not a bad idea. One thing that might also help the bitterness is the fact that most ports are atleast somewhat sweet thus the bitter can be balanced out with ease.


 
hmmmm... Good point.


----------



## Deezil (Mar 28, 2014)

You know, I read this thread and thought 3-4 times "Oh, but.." - only to read the next post, and it say exactly what I was gonna say.. You guys are on a roll today!


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 28, 2014)

we so smart ( ;


----------



## JohnT (Mar 28, 2014)

and sooooo freakin modest lol


----------



## vacuumpumpman (Mar 28, 2014)

very intresting post -
I always felt if I added my fortifier that the grape skins or other fruit would soak up the alcohol, and I would have to fight in order to get it back.

I do cold masculate prior to making port for approx 4-5 days - prior to pitching the yeast.


----------



## salcoco (Mar 29, 2014)

here is a method recommended by Northern Brewer 

View attachment MakingPortWine.pdf


----------



## sour_grapes (Mar 29, 2014)

Ack, stupid typesetting! The formula in that document that Salcoco listed is missing a set of parentheses, which makes it incorrect.

Here is what they meant (which, of course, is the same as A Pearson's Square):

X = V*(C-A) / (B-C), where

X = GAL BRANDY NEEDED 
V = GALLONS OF WINE 
C = FINAL ALCOHOL % WANTED 
B = ALCOHOL % OF BRANDY 
A = ALCOHOL % OF WINE


----------



## sour_grapes (Mar 29, 2014)

After my last post, I used the "Contact Us" form on NorthernBrewer's website to alert them to the error. I actually got a response saying they would fix it quickly!


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 29, 2014)

Indeed, parenthesis are rather important.


----------



## Wade E (Mar 29, 2014)

John T, I dont think your idea is a very good 1 at all. But I guess the only way you could prove it to me would be to send me a few bottles to taste test your theory! LOL Hehehehehe


----------



## JohnT (Mar 29, 2014)

Wade E said:


> John T, I dont think your idea is a very good 1 at all. But I guess the only way you could prove it to me would be to send me a few bottles to taste test your theory! LOL Hehehehehe



pm me your address and i will send you some when we bottle.

in the mean time, perhaps we can discuss ibglowin's avatar... (insert sinister laugh here).


----------



## JohnT (Mar 29, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> Ack, stupid typesetting! The formula in that document that Salcoco listed is missing a set of parantheses, which makes it incorrect.
> 
> Here is what they meant (which, of course, is the same as A Pearson's Square):
> 
> ...



i found a little playing i needed... if you know the abv and ending residual sugar that you want, the just the pearsons square will no do it. i found that i made two pearson's squares.. one for sugar, and one for abv.


----------



## Duster (Mar 30, 2014)

Ok now I'm confused.
I have 12 gallon of wine at 12.5%
I want to use E&J vsop brandy at 40%
If want to raise it to 15% I need 1.2 gallons of brandy? 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making App


----------



## Deezil (Mar 30, 2014)

Duster said:


> I have 12 gallon of wine at 12.5%
> I want to use E&J vsop brandy at 40%
> If want to raise it to 15% I need 1.2 gallons of brandy?



Yes, sir..


----------



## JohnT (Mar 31, 2014)

Something just occurred to me.. 

It looks like most folks are fermenting their wine dry, then adding sugar and fortifier after fermentation of the wine is complete. Is this what most people do? 

I do it a little bit differently. I wait for the base wine to get to a specific brix level, then end the fermentation by adding a specific amount of fortifier. If I do my math right, I end up with a port with a specific abv and specific residual sugar. In other words, I try to use the natural sugars in the grape to sweeten my port.

Is anybody else doing this? If so, how do you end up doing the math? Seems like there is not single formula one can use. 

My trouble is if I wanted to end up with a port having 8% residual sugar, I need to know the total volume of base wine that I am using.... 

But, if I try to determine the amount of base wine to use, I need to know the abv of the base wine (or brix).

I ended up creating almost a "double Pearson's square" and just played around with the total brix and base wine volume until I got it right. I am wondering if anybody else has a better way??


----------



## seth8530 (Mar 31, 2014)

I do.. Give me a few and I will explain.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 1, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> I do.. Give me a few and I will explain.


 

Seth... Any luck?


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

Yeah, I just have not had the time to write it all down yet. Just to make sure we are all on the same page...

You want to know how must spirit you need to add to ensure that you hit both a target abv and sugar?


----------



## JohnT (Apr 1, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Yeah, I just have not had the time to write it all down yet. Just to make sure we are all on the same page...
> 
> You want to know how must spirit you need to add to ensure that you hit both a target abv and sugar?


 
yes, given a fixed volume, base wine starting brix, desired abv, and residual sugar. 

I would like obtain a recommended base wine ending brix, and proportions of base wine to fortifier.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

Cool, working on a solution. Thus far I have decided it will be easier to work in g/l land to designate sugar concentration instead of brix to make the math work out. Thus far I have managed to come up with an ABV equation which relates ABV to the change in sugar concentration in units of g/l.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

So after giving this a good luck I am not sure if this can be calculated by hand if you take into account what you want your final sugar to be after the spirit fortification addition. Right now I am playing around with writing a short script to try and solve it by running iterations.


----------



## vacuumpumpman (Apr 1, 2014)

Here are some good conversion tables - let me know if these help at all ?

http://www.winebusiness.com/tools/?go=winemaking.calc&sid=7

http://vinoenology.com/calculators/fortification/


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

Well, I have pretty much already solved for what those programs do. The trick I am having to deal with is figuring out how to make it work so that I can hit both a desired ending ABV and desired ending sugar.


----------



## vacuumpumpman (Apr 1, 2014)

Seth 
I always have to watch the hydrometer till I reach my desired ending sugar - then calculate how much white brandy to stop fermenation 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Wine Making mobile app


----------



## Deezil (Apr 1, 2014)

You might have to write the math to solve for the 1, then use that answer to solve for the other... then code it to display both...


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

Alright, I think I got it! I wrote up a script in matlab to solve.

The way the solver works is that it fist solves for the volume of spirit needed to reach a certain abv when you have a certain sugar drop. 

Once that is done it checks to see if the spirit addition lowered your sugar concentration below your desired level (it will). Once that is done it increases the sugar concentration (final gravity) at which you add the brandy. Once that happens the ABV from the fermentation goes down so it then adds more brandy.

It keeps on doing this until it converges on a solution. I had to play around with it quite a bit since their are quite a few solutions that will work but many of them do not make sense...


If anyone is willing to take my code and turn it into something other than MATLAB please feel free to do it, but give me credit. The only other language that I can turn this into is FORTRAN .EXE that requires you to add a .dll library to your PC. In the Past my FORTAN programs on the forum did not really take off all that big and I suspect that is the reason why.





> %% Program written by Seth Langford
> % This program is meant for open use by anyone who needs to fortify
> % beer/wine/mead
> % If you use the code for your own programs please give me credit
> ...


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

vacuumpumpman said:


> Seth
> I always have to watch the hydrometer till I reach my desired ending sugar - then calculate how much white brandy to stop fermenation
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Wine Making mobile app



Yup, but the issue with that is that you add brandy and then you change your sugar level because of the brandy you added in the wine. Pretty much what the script does is tell you at which gravity do you need to add spirit and how much spirit to reach a certain ABV and sugar level.



Deezil said:


> You might have to write the math to solve for the 1, then use that answer to solve for the other... then code it to display both...



That is kind of what I did. I tried solving it with a system of equations using pen and paper but for some reason I could not get a solution.. Thus, I applied the same logic you laid out but with numerical methods.


----------



## sjo (Apr 1, 2014)

" I made a small side batch of wine just for use in port" Quote from JohnT so I am going to call this the JohnT method.

I started to make what I thought was a port using 8 gallons of frontenac grapes. I fermented grapes and added sugar until yeast died out. somewhere around 18%. There is a little residual sugar (sg1.08) I then used the johnT method and brought to 24% alc calculated. Added oak and is now aging.

My question is why stop fermentation by fortifying instead of letting it finish the ferment and backsweeten later.
Scott


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

The theory is that the natural grape sugars will taste better or give a fuller wine than simply adding back sugar syrup.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 1, 2014)

Seth: I know you have looked into this a bit. What's your take on the conversion between (and the relative advantages/disadvantages) of SG vs. grams/liter sugar? Is this as good a source as any for the conversion:
http://mpesgens.home.xs4all.nl/thwp/sugar.html ?


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

I use this as my source for common wine conversions

http://www.brsquared.org/wine/CalcInfo/HydSugAl.htm

If it was not for the fact that most people make wine and use SG I would use exclusively units of g/l or brix. The reason why I like units of g/l is because you can multiply by your total volume of must and you can get the total mass of sugar in the wine. Which makes life a whole LOT easier if you like to make wine smart and calculate how much everything you want to add instead of looking at the hydrometer.

BTW, according to some math that I did you can relate the drop in g/l to ABV.. Ie (Initial g/l-Final g/l)/20 =ABV Or if you like this versoin better (Delta g/l)/20=ABV

The advantage of using SG is that it actually tells you the density of the fluid you are working with in g/cm^3. Thus if you know the mass of your fluid you can get the volume back out which is pretty cool.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 1, 2014)

Interesting -- your source is quite linear, whereas the one I (randomly) cited has non-linearities in it.

I got your script running. (Nice work, clever approach.) I had a question about that factor of 0.05 (or 1/20). What is the basic root of it? Is it empirical, or is it based on molecular masses, etc.?

I was thinking of trying to identify the equations, and linearize them around the likely ending place (say, 20% ABV and 75 g/l sugar). Haven't taken pencil to paper yet, but I think that may work.

I also am wondering if the exact solution will turn out to be an eigenvalue problem, where we take your system of equations, express as a matrix, and set the determinant equal to zero....


----------



## vacuumpumpman (Apr 1, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Yup, but the issue with that is that you add brandy and then you change your sugar level because of the brandy you added in the wine. Pretty much what the script does is tell you at which gravity do you need to add spirit and how much spirit to reach a certain ABV and sugar level.
> .



Seth - 
If I am using white brandy (everclear with oak added) will that still raise the sugar level ?


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 1, 2014)

vacuumpumpman said:


> Seth -
> If I am using white brandy (everclear with oak added) will that still raise the sugar level ?



No, he didn't say it would _raise_ the sugar level. He said it would _change_ the sugar level. It reduces the g/l of sugar because it adds to the denominator (i.e., increases the volume). Seth is assuming (in his script) that the spirit has no sugar at all.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 1, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> Interesting -- your source is quite linear, whereas the one I (randomly) cited has non-linearities in it.
> 
> I got your script running. (Nice work, clever approach.) I had a question about that factor of 0.05 (or 1/20). What is the basic root of it? Is it empirical, or is it based on molecular masses, etc.?
> 
> ...



Umm, I was having trouble getting a good system of *Independent * equations to make a system of equations work out.. Atleast I think that was the issue I was having. If you can make this work with an analytical solution then I shall tip my hat off to you.

What I did to come up with the factor of .05 was take

ABV=131*(FG-SG) Then I set that equal to K*(gLiterFinal-gLiterInitial)=ABV. I then set the equations equal to each other in an excel sheet and solved for K at a whole bunch of values. In each case it came up to around .0496 something.. So I just took the average and rounded up. I am attaching the excel sheet I used to come up with that if you are curios.

BTW, very cool work on getting my script running. What did you compile it with? I am currently in the final stages of getting a .exe version of my script ready for release that was rewritten in C++ which actually prompts the user for information to input.. But I am having a bit of trouble with my libraries at the moment. 

BTW, very interesting thing to note... just like you said, our tables are not quite the same are they? Pretty close though





vacuumpumpman said:


> Seth -
> If I am using white brandy (everclear with oak added) will that still raise the sugar level ?



Nope only lower it just like grapeman said. 

View attachment PortCalcStuff.zip


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> If you can make this work with an analytical solution then I shall tip my hat off to you.




Umm, get ready to tip. I hate to tell you, though, I didn't have to pull out any big guns; it only required algebra. For a minute, I thought it was going to turn into a quadratic equation, but it didn't even do that.

I built off the excellent foundation you laid. 
*Parameters:*
volume_wine (in liters)
rho_i_wine (initial g/l sugar)
rho_port (desired g/l in port)
ABV_port (desired ABV of port)
ABV_brandy (I am using "brandy" as my spirit!)
(derived quantity: ABV_wine=(rho_i_wine - rho_f_wine)/20, as per Seth)

*Unknowns*
volume_brandy
rho_f_wine (final g/l sugar in wine)

*2 independent equations*

(1, the sugar equation) rho_port = rho_f_wine*volume_wine/(volume_wine + volume_brandy)

(2, the alcohol equation)
ABV_port= (volume_wine*ABV_wine + volume_brandy*ABV_brandy) / (volume_wine + volume_brandy)

I solved Eqn 1 for rho_f_wine to find:
rho_f_wine = rho_port*(volume_wine + volume_brandy)/volume_wine ,

then I shoved that into Eqn. 2 (after substituting your derived quantity for ABV_wine). You can easily, i.e., algebraically solve for volume_brandy.

The result is:

*
volume_brandy = {ABV_port - (rho_i_wine - rho_port)/20} / (ABV_brandy - ABV_port - rho_port/20)
*

This is the desired volume of brandy in liters.

You then substitute that value into Eqn. 1 to find rho_f_wine. 

The result is:

*
rho_f_wine = (ABV_brandy - rho_i_wine/20) / (ABV_brandy - ABV_port - rho_port/20)
*

Remember, this is the residual sugar that you want (in g/l) at the time you should fortify to stop fermentation.

I did check that this gives the same result as your MatLab script. (I didn't compile it, I just ran it on MatLab.)

You can either use ABV as a number between 0 and 100 and use rho in g/l, or you can use ABV as a fraction (number between 0 and 1) and use rho (in g/l)/100; this comes from the fermentation conversion of rho/20, which provides the ABV as a percentage, so you have to divide by another 100 to get ABV to a fraction instead of percentage. I think most people would be best served to use ABV as a number from 0 to 100, and sugar in g/l.

For all you people who would prefer to use SG rather than g/l of sugar, the conversion is close to:

SG = 1 + rho/2644 where rho is in g/l,

Or, of course, rho = (SG-1)*2644.

HTH, John et alii


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

One more thought/question/complication. If you take 1 l of pure alcohol, and 1 liter of pure water, and you mix them, then you do not get 2 l of mixture. The volume is a bit less than 2 l. I don't think we need to worry about this in this case, because we are already dealing with ethanol/water solutions. However, I cannot be sure. I am quite confident, however, that the effect will be small in the present problem, smaller than the errors associated with measuring SG and volumes.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 2, 2014)

sjo said:


> " I made a small side batch of wine just for use in port" Quote from JohnT so I am going to call this the JohnT method.
> 
> I started to make what I thought was a port using 8 gallons of frontenac grapes. I fermented grapes and added sugar until yeast died out. somewhere around 18%. There is a little residual sugar (sg1.08) I then used the johnT method and brought to 24% alc calculated. Added oak and is now aging.
> 
> ...


 
SJO, 

My goal was to not add any sugar. I wanted the natural sugars of the grape only. With this in mind, letting the wine ferment dry is not an option. 

A number of years ago, I used both methods, taking half a batch and stopping the fermentation, and allowing the other half to ferment dry and be back-sweetened and fortified. 

I found that I preferred the "stopped fermentation" much, much more. It is, however, just a matter of taste.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 2, 2014)

Seth, SG, VPM, 

I can not tell you how much I admire those that rise to a challenge! 

You guys are simply the best!

johnT.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> Umm, get ready to tip. I hate to tell you, though, I didn't have to pull out any big guns; it only required algebra. For a minute, I thought it was going to turn into a quadratic equation, but it didn't even do that.
> 
> I built off the excellent foundation you laid.
> *Parameters:*
> ...



Looks like you did good work, I was originally trying to do the same exact thing you ended up doing, but for some reason it was not working out. Thus, I gave up and moved on to the solver script. 

BTW, great to here that the answers are coming out the same! That is always a good check.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 2, 2014)

Now if we cold only find someone that can convert this into an app, we could then share it with all the forum members!


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

Yep yep, I am working on cleaning up Sour's take on my stuff. I am trying to get it into a single equation which can be easily used. I have an "app" written and I should be able to upload it as a .exe as soon as I can compile it.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

Well, I put this into an Excel sheet, which you are welcome to (if I can figure out how to attach it). There are two sheets: one you input the sugar in g/l, the other you input the SG of the must instead. In both sheets, you input parameters in the yellow boxes, and the answers come out in the blue boxes. 

View attachment fortification.zip


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

Looks like that will also work, I will try and verify your excel sheet against my code, I will also try and come up with a single equation just to sate my damaged pride (; . 


Over all, great work!


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Looks like that will also work, I will try and verify your excel sheet against my code, I will also try and come up with a single equation just to sate my damaged pride (; .
> 
> 
> Over all, great work!



Sounds great, Seth. If it makes you feel any better and partially salves your wounded pride  , I likely wouldn't have been able to solve it if you hadn't set the problem up first. And you are correct, working in grams/liter simplifies the algebra significantly.

I am a bit confused what you mean by "try to come up with a single equation." I already came up with the minimum number of equations, viz., two, one for sugar in the must, the other for volume of brandy. Do you mean you will re-derive and verify my result, or do you have something else in mind?


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

Lol, it does make me feel a bit better. Pretty much what I plan on doing is smashing the two equations down into one via substitution. That way only one equation needs to be solved. I was pretty close to getting to work out this morning, but I needed to go to my lab meeting and I was getting negative numbers due to an algebra error.

Ie just to give you an idea of where I am going I plan on taking

ABV=X+Y
Y=X^2+35

Thus
ABV=X+X^2+35

of course with different numbers and variables and all, but you get the idea.

BTW, just curious, where did you develop your math and critical thinking skills from?


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

Yeah, that is what I did, as described in the initial post. That is, take a system of two equations in two variables, solve one of the equations for one variable, substitute into the second equation to get an equation in one variable, then solve it. Then back-substitute that solution into the first equation to solve for the first variable. (I.e., the standard approach for solving a system of two equations.)

When you do this, you'll eventually see that this is _formally_ no more complicated a problem than "If one train leaves Wichita traveling south at 35 mph at 6 pm, and another leaves Oklahoma City traveling north at 20 mph at 7 pm, when and where do they meet?" However, the fact that the unknown variables appear in the numerator _and_ denominator makes it much more complicated to solve. That is why I thought it would turn into a quadratic equation (along with the fact that you said your numerical approach gave false solutions), but, as I say, it didn't.



> BTW, just curious, where did you develop your math and critical thinking skills from?



Well, let's see, I suppose HS, college, grad school, and 25 years of being a scientist!


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

Yeah, well my pride still demands I solve it myself lol.

Yup, you sounded like a fellow sciency guy, I guess technically engineering students are not scientist... I dont know, maybe they are lol


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 2, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Yeah, well my pride still demands I solve it myself lol.



Can't sez I blames you! 



> Yup, you sounded like a fellow sciency guy, I guess technically engineering students are not scientist... I dont know, maybe they are lol



I make little distinction.

Once in a while, the small differences in the approaches of the two professions becomes evident, but not often.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 2, 2014)

Yep yep, well I got kind of busy, so it might be a few days before I can double check your work in detail ( quality assurance). However, I look forward towards giving it another go soon.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 3, 2014)

*** General Notice ***


If any of you folks feel like this is over your head, do not feel bad. 

I have bs degrees in mathematics, comp sci, and physics. When I ran out of tuition money and had to get a job (about 30 years ago), I opted for IT. 

What can I say, at the time it paid. 

Long story short, I have not needed to use any of the math I learned in over 30 years and these two fella are smoking me. 

The method I used last year was to keep playing with the two equations until I had a port with the correct residual natural sugar and the correct abv. It took a lot of back and forth and about an hour of my time. An app would be incredible helpful. 

Aside: Rather than call this the johnT method, we should call this the WMT method!


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 3, 2014)

JohnT said:


> An app would be incredible helpful.



John, you are in IT -- surely you could get my Excel spreadsheet to run, no? 

I, on the other hand, don't have the "skilz" needed to compile an app.... sigh.


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 3, 2014)

I can make an "app" The question is whether or not you would be comfortable running the .EXE


----------



## JohnT (Apr 4, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> I can make an "app" The question is whether or not you would be comfortable running the .EXE


 


sour_grapes said:


> John, you are in IT -- surely you could get my Excel spreadsheet to run, no?
> 
> I, on the other hand, don't have the "skilz" needed to compile an app.... sigh.


 
SG, 

I have never written an app. most of what I do is in "larger" languages. 
I am thinking that if we had someone that new app coding, we could download this to our phones and not have to boot up a computer in order to do the calculations. 

That spreadsheet is sweet. 

Last year, I did everything in terms of brix. If I assume that 1 brix is about 10gpl of sugar, the formulas confirm what I did. 


******************************************************
HEY DAN, JULIE, WADE, Et Al... 
******************************************************
These guys came up with a great tool for the forum members... 

I see that Seth already has a premium membership, but how about gifting one to Sourgrapes?
******************************************************


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2014)

JohnT said:


> I see that Seth already has a premium membership, but how about gifting one to Sourgrapes?




No, no, no! Thank you so much for the suggestion, John, but that does not feel right. I have been meaning to pay my 15 simoleons for some time, and you just pushed me over the edge. (Unwittingly guilted me into it?  ) The deed is done, so no need for a gift membership. But thanks anyway!


----------



## JohnT (Apr 4, 2014)

SG, 

I have been meaning to do the same. Just never got around to it. 

johnT.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2014)

Whoa, this is a welcome sight: (No more cleaning up needed!)


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 4, 2014)

Yup, and now you get a bigger avatar....


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> Yup, and now you get a bigger avatar....



Thanks for the reminder! Just uploaded the same file, and, voila, it is rendered larger!


----------



## JohnT (Apr 4, 2014)

Hmmmm, 

Just signed on for a premium membership, but my avatar is still the same size. Wonder if I need to do anything....


----------



## Boatboy24 (Apr 4, 2014)

JohnT said:


> Hmmmm,
> 
> Just signed on for a premium membership, but my avatar is still the same size. Wonder if I need to do anything....



Some guys are just smaller than others...


----------



## JohnT (Apr 4, 2014)

Boatboy24 said:


> Some guys are just smaller than others...


 

Gee / ouch!, Starve a man for 29 days and he gets NASTY!!!!


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 4, 2014)

John, it doesn't happen automagically. You just have to reload your avatar, and it will load it as a larger version.


----------



## Boatboy24 (Apr 4, 2014)

Love the new avatar, John!


----------



## downunder (May 1, 2014)

All I can say is WOW, what a difference! This year's port is perhaps the best I ever made.

Does anybody else make port for fresh fruit? If so, do you continue to macerate after the point of fortification? 

To answer your question its that time of year down here...Just made a 1000 litres of port just the way you made it and yes we do continue to macerate after fortification untill about 7 days from first crush. When we add the fortifying spirit we also add sulfur to about the level of 90ppm total.
The spirit helps to extract colour and flavours out of the grapes.
And while I understand what everybody is trying to do with formulas to make the perfect port.....one thing seems to have been forgotten......Taste.
Every year the grapes vary in the amount of acid, tannin etc. So while the initial baume etc may be the same as last years (I wish) the mouth feel will be completely different. More acid and tannins make the port taste less sweet even if you have your "perfect" residual sugar.
What I would suggest is to have a ballpark figure of say 120 to 140 g/l residual sugar.(adjust this figure to suit your own individual taste). when your baume hydrometer shows you are close to this figure I do a quick alcohol test which gives me how much alcohol to add to bring it up to say 18% let your taste buds tell you when to actually fortify your residual sugar will then drop to say 100 to 120 g/l.


----------



## sour_grapes (May 1, 2014)

downunder said:


> And while I understand what everybody is trying to do with formulas to make the perfect port.....one thing seems to have been forgotten......Taste.
> Every year the grapes vary in the amount of acid, tannin etc. So while the initial baume etc may be the same as last years (I wish) the mouth feel will be completely different. More acid and tannins make the port taste less sweet even if you have your "perfect" residual sugar.



Okay, I believe I understand your point, and it makes sense to me so far, but....



> What I would suggest is to have a ballpark figure of say 120 to 140 g/l residual sugar.(adjust this figure to suit your own individual taste). *when your baume hydrometer shows you are close to this figure I do a quick alcohol test which gives me how much alcohol to add to bring it up to say 18%* let your taste buds tell you when to actually fortify your residual sugar will then drop to say 100 to 120 g/l.



I don't see how these instructions differ in any way from what the formula that I derived does. I am trying to understand where the winemaker's latitude comes in in your approach. Is it just because you are allowing a _range_ of 120 to 140, and you pull the trigger (and fortify) somewhere in that range depending on your taste?


----------



## sour_grapes (Aug 15, 2020)

Bump for @JamesdNorcal


----------



## winemanden (Aug 25, 2020)

JohnT said:


> Seth,
> 
> That I exactly what I am saying. Maceration with the fortifier seemed to bring out more of the body of the wine.
> 
> ...


John, I'm not taking a cheap shot at you or your port - if you were in the EU you wouldn't be allowed to call it port. From what I've read, port makers add young brandy to the must at about halfway point to let it kill off the yeast slowly. Then when it is dead they drain off the port. How long it takes to kill the yeast I don't know. If it's good enough for "so called Real port makers" then you're doing more or less the same thing. Can't seem to find any info on what they do with the skins afterwards.
“Port is not for the very young, the vain and the active. It is the comfort of age and the companion of the scholar and the philosopher”
-- Evelyn Waugh


----------



## sour_grapes (Aug 25, 2020)

winemanden said:


> John, I'm not taking a cheap shot at you or your port - if you were in the EU you wouldn't be allowed to call it port.



Because he is not in Oporto, you mean, or because of his technique? (We all know that we are very liberal with our terminology, i.e., not always saying "style" after something like "Bordeaux.")



> From what I've read, port makers add young brandy to the must at about halfway point to let it kill off the yeast slowly. Then when it is dead they drain off the port. How long it takes to kill the yeast I don't know. If it's good enough for "so called Real port makers" then you're doing more or less the same thing. Can't seem to find any info on what they do with the skins afterwards.
> “Port is not for the very young, the vain and the active. It is the comfort of age and the companion of the scholar and the philosopher”
> -- Evelyn Waugh



Yes, the technique you describe is exactly what was being discussed here. What is it that you objected to?


----------



## richmke (Aug 26, 2020)

winemanden said:


> Can't seem to find any info on what they do with the skins afterwards.



"Grape pomace has traditionally been used to produce pomace brandy (such as grappa, orujo, törkölypálinka, zivania). Today, it is mostly used as fodder, as fertilizer, or to extract bioactive compounds like polyphenols from it."








Pomace - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





"Rather than using the pomace as vineyard compost, turning it into feed supplements for cattle or dumping it in landfills, Seneca BioEnergy in Romulus, N.Y., plans to process the pomace, converting it into grapeseed oil, biodiesel fuel and manufactured soil. "





Putting Pomace to Work | Wine Spectator


As wineries consider ways to squeeze that last dollar out of their grapes, they're looking to what's left after they squeeze the juice out of them—the grape pomace, or mass of skins, pulp and seeds leftover from the winemaking process.




www.winespectator.com


----------



## winemanden (Aug 28, 2020)

richmke said:


> "Grape pomace has traditionally been used to produce pomace brandy (such as grappa, orujo, törkölypálinka, zivania). Today, it is mostly used as fodder, as fertilizer, or to extract bioactive compounds like polyphenols from it."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quite right. I completely forgot about Grappa. Some of ti is very expensive.


----------



## winemanden (Aug 28, 2020)

sour_grapes said:


> Because he is not in Oporto, you mean, or because of his technique? (We all know that we are very liberal with our terminology, i.e., not always saying "style" after something like "Bordeaux.")
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the technique you describe is exactly what was being discussed here. What is it that you objected to?


Not objecting to anything at all. Just pointing out that if it's good enough for "so called Real port makers" then you're doing more or less the same thing. As for The Oporto bit, if it means anything to you, I voted to leave the damned EU!!!


----------



## sour_grapes (Aug 28, 2020)

winemanden said:


> Not objecting to anything at all. Just pointing out that if it's good enough for "so called Real port makers" then you're doing more or less the same thing. As for The Oporto bit, if it means anything to you, I voted to leave the damned EU!!!



Okay, you didn't object to it. You just wanted to point out to everyone that some other party would object to it. Got it.


----------

