Glycerin Question

[NewfieMike]

Merry Christmas all!
Hope everyone is having a great holiday season so far.

I too would like to increase the body/mouth-feel of my wines and decided to try adding glycerin to a En Premeur Cab Sav kit.
After reading many of the previous glycerin posts, a few of you add between 0.5 - 1.0 oz per gallon depending on the sharpness and what you feel it needs.
I decided to add 0.6oz at bottling time March 23, '24 and prepped several small wine bottles extra to test over time.

Here's my questions: I just tried one of the small bottles and the wine taste seems off. I know the wine is still young but I'm shocked that the taste, smell and flavor are dramatically reduced from bottling time.
- Could I have added too much glycerin ? I'm using finishing formula glycerin with directions to add 30ml per 6 gallons.
- Yes it's very young so will time improve it ?
- I did add sorbate (which I don't add anymore to red), could this affect the wine after adding glycerin?

Here's my biggest question. I have an EP Amarone ready to be bottled after being in bulk for 13 months. I'm hesitate now to add any glycerin to this one and wondering if I should add glycerin or not ?

I few extra details from my notes on the cab.
No bentonite, 6week EM on skins/oak, sorbate, kmeta, no K&C.
12 month bulk age on oak cubes; filtered using allinone pump before glycerin, then bottled.
For curiosity the FG at tasting is 0.996. No change since coming off Em.

 

[Christopher Anderson]

Merry Christmas all!
Hope everyone is having a great holiday season so far.

I too would like to increase the body/mouth-feel of my wines and decided to try adding glycerin to a En Premeur Cab Sav kit.
After reading many of the previous glycerin posts, a few of you add between 0.5 - 1.0 oz per gallon depending on the sharpness and what you feel it needs.
I decided to add 0.6oz at bottling time March 23, '24 and prepped several small wine bottles extra to test over time.

Here's my questions: I just tried one of the small bottles and the wine taste seems off. I know the wine is still young but I'm shocked that the taste, smell and flavor are dramatically reduced from bottling time.
- Could I have added too much glycerin ? I'm using finishing formula glycerin with directions to add 30ml per 6 gallons.
- Yes it's very young so will time improve it ?
- I did add sorbate (which I don't add anymore to red), could this affect the wine after adding glycerin? View attachment 119032

Here's my biggest question. I have an EP Amarone ready to be bottled after being in bulk for 13 months. I'm hesitate now to add any glycerin to this one and wondering if I should add glycerin or not ?

I few extra details from my notes on the cab.
No bentonite, 6week EM on skins/oak, sorbate, kmeta, no K&C.
12 month bulk age on oak cubes; filtered using allinone pump before bottling then added glycerin.
For curiosity the FG at tasting is 0.996. No change since coming off Em.

Why not split the bottling? Add glycerin to 1/2 and nothing to 1/2.

 

[NewfieMike]

Why not split the bottling? Add glycerin to 1/2 and nothing to 1/2.

I'm definitely leaning that way Chris.

 

[winemaker81]

Here's my questions: I just tried one of the small bottles and the wine taste seems off. I know the wine is still young but I'm shocked that the taste, smell and flavor are dramatically reduced from bottling time.
- Could I have added too much glycerin ? I'm using finishing formula glycerin with directions to add 30ml per 6 gallons.

IME, glycerin masks flaws and enhances flavors. Both with and without sorbate. Effect is immediate. I've never had a problem like yours.

When did you start the kit? Give it a couple of months and try another bottle.

 

[NewfieMike]

IME, glycerin masks flaws and enhances flavors. Both with and without sorbate. Effect is immediate. I've never had a problem like yours.

When did you start the kit? Give it a couple of months and try another bottle.

Thanks for the reply Bryan, and that's what I'll do.

Kit was started Feb 17, '23
Bottled March 23, '24.

 

[BPL]

My question: many add glycerin or Gum Arabic just before bottling, but don't you stir it in? will that not mix up any leeds or junk left in the bottom? Why not add and let sit for a few days before bottling?

Apart from the mixing/blending Glycerin or Gum Arabic, adding anything that has a higher density than the wine will INCREASE the gravity. If increasing the gravity with any lees or sediment in the bottom, the settling of any particulate will be problematic. Generally, clearing a higher gravity wine is harder than one that has a lower gravity. This is one of the reasons why if back sweetening wine, it's best done after clearing.

 

[winemaker81]

Apart from the mixing/blending Glycerin or Gum Arabic, adding anything that has a higher density than the wine will INCREASE the gravity. If increasing the gravity with any lees or sediment in the bottom, the settling of any particulate will be problematic. Generally, clearing a higher gravity wine is harder than one that has a lower gravity. This is one of the reasons why if back sweetening wine, it's best done after clearing.

The SG table in my first post in this thread demonstrates how additives change the SG.

https://www.winemakingtalk.com/threads/2023-port.79636/

 

[Rice_Guy]

steeping back a few posts, with high viscosity ingredients it is useful to make a pre blend for wetting particulates or reducing the density so it doesn’t sink as fast

~ 0.5% mixtures~ gum arabic doesn’t really set a texture so you can’t over do the product
, , , that would make “jello shots “ hard though
, , , and guar gum keeps particulates like cocoa in milk suspended
bench trials help learning what the limitations/ benefits are

 

[BPL]

The SG table in my first post in this thread demonstrates how additives change the SG.

https://www.winemakingtalk.com/threads/2023-port.79636/

Exactly. I found out the hard way why I should have paid more attention in physics class.

 

[BarrelMonkey]

- I did add sorbate (which I don't add anymore to red), could this affect the wine after adding glycerin?

...

I few extra details from my notes on the cab.
No bentonite, 6week EM on skins/oak, sorbate, kmeta, no K&C.
12 month bulk age on oak cubes; filtered using allinone pump before glycerin, then bottled.
For curiosity the FG at tasting is 0.996. No change since coming off Em.

Yes, sorbate can certainly affect taste. It is contraindicated in wines that have undergone ML (malolactic fermentation), since it can lead to what is described as a 'geranium' smell/taste in the wine.

I'm not familiar with kits though I believe most of them don't include a ML step. However, given that you did a 6-week EM with skins/oak, it's entirely possible that some ML bugs endemic to the skins or oak kicked off and were still viable when you bottled/added sorbate. Maybe there was also some viable ML activity in your primary fermentation...

 

[winemaker81]

I'm not familiar with kits though I believe most of them don't include a ML step. However, given that you did a 6-week EM with skins/oak, it's entirely possible that some ML bugs endemic to the skins or oak kicked off and were still viable when you bottled/added sorbate. Maybe there was also some viable ML activity in your primary fermentation...

MLB will eat natural malic acid, but not artificial malic acid, which is what is typically used in kits. [I don't know the technical difference between the two types] For that reason MLF supposedly doesn't work on most kits.

Supposedly MLF will work on FWK as the concentrate is created using a difference process, but I haven't seen anyone do a chromatography on one.

 

[wineview]

MLB will eat natural malic acid, but not artificial malic acid, which is what is typically used in kits. [I don't know the technical difference between the two types] For that reason MLF supposedly doesn't work on most kits.

Supposedly MLF will work on FWK as the concentrate is created using a difference process, but I haven't seen anyone do a chromatography on one.

Will MLF work on fresh juice buckets?

 

[winemaker81]

Will MLF work on fresh juice buckets?

MLF will work on any fresh grapes, whole fruit or juice. This assumes there is sufficient malic acid for the bacteria to eat, and some varietals don't have a lot of malic acid.

 

[BarrelMonkey]

MLB will eat natural malic acid, but not artificial malic acid, which is what is typically used in kits. [I don't know the technical difference between the two types] For that reason MLF supposedly doesn't work on most kits.

Supposedly MLF will work on FWK as the concentrate is created using a difference process, but I haven't seen anyone do a chromatography on one.

The difference is stereochemistry; malic acid exists in grape juice as the L ('left-handed') form whereas the D ('right-handed') form is not metabolized by LAB. As you suggest, for this reason if you want to acidify your grape juice (and not have it undergo MLF), you can add D-malic acid. Professional winemakers sometimes do this too.

But surely, if kits contain grape juice (albeit processed in some way), they will have at least some L-malic acid?

 

[wineview]

MLF will work on any fresh grapes, whole fruit or juice. This assumes there is sufficient malic acid for the bacteria to eat, and some varietals don't have a lot of malic acid.

The reason for asking is this. I had a couple of fresh Barolo buckets that refused to convert. I took multiple chromatography tests with very little success. Finally I just left in bulk for another year to insure no bottle bombs.

 

[winemaker81]

But surely, if kits contain grape juice (albeit processed in some way), they will have at least some L-malic acid?

Thanks for the clarification. I had NO clue what the difference is, and was too lazy to look it up.

I'd think the kits would contain natural malic acid. From what I've read, the kit acid is balanced with the D malic acid, for reasons unknown.

My understanding is that the standard concentration process is a low temperature evaporation. I wouldn't expect that to change the malic acid, but it appears that it does.

I also accept the possibility that at least some of the understanding of kits and MLF is simply wrong, e.g., an incorrect statement is being accepted as fact.

The reason for asking is this. I had a couple of fresh Barolo buckets that refused to convert. I took multiple chromatography tests with very little success. Finally I just left in bulk for another year to insure no bottle bombs.

Reading through MLF threads for the last 5 years or so, a lot of folks have trouble getting MLF going and/or completing. Some strains of MLB are apparently harder to work with than others.

Liquid MLF is commonly reported as being problematic. Some of the dried strains as well. The presence of SO2 blocks the bacteria -- which makes me wonder if some of the failures are due to a larger amount of natural SO2 produced by the grapes?

I chose Lalvin 31 simply because @VinesnBines had good luck with it.

Funny, yesterday in another venue someone stated that ALL wines go through MLF. I asked my usual question with respect to that statement: "If that is true, why do so many people have trouble getting MLF to complete when inoculating?" Crickets are still chirping ... no answer.

This is another one where the common belief (all wines undergo MLF) may be an incorrect statement repeated enough to be taken as fact.

 

[wineview]

Thanks for the clarification. I had NO clue what the difference is, and was too lazy to look it up.

I'd think the kits would contain natural malic acid. From what I've read, the kit acid is balanced with the D malic acid, for reasons unknown.

My understanding is that the standard concentration process is a low temperature evaporation. I wouldn't expect that to change the malic acid, but it appears that it does.

I also accept the possibility that at least some of the understanding of kits and MLF is simply wrong, e.g., an incorrect statement is being accepted as fact.


Reading through MLF threads for the last 5 years or so, a lot of folks have trouble getting MLF going and/or completing. Some strains of MLB are apparently harder to work with than others.

Liquid MLF is commonly reported as being problematic. Some of the dried strains as well. The presence of SO2 blocks the bacteria -- which makes me wonder if some of the failures are due to a larger amount of natural SO2 produced by the grapes?

I chose Lalvin 31 simply because @VinesnBines had good luck with it.

Funny, yesterday in another venue someone stated that ALL wines go through MLF. I asked my usual question with respect to that statement: "If that is true, why do so many people have trouble getting MLF to complete when inoculating?" Crickets are still chirping ... no answer.

This is another one where the common belief (all wines undergo MLF) may be an incorrect statement repeated enough to be taken as fact.

Initially I started with a liquid bacteria that really did nothing. The weather was hot and the shipper didn’t cool pack it. I think the bacteria was DOA. Then I tried Viniflora CH 35 and still nothing. That experience has made me shy away from trying it again. That was two years ago and I have been thinking of trying again. What is a good varietal candidate for MLF.

 

[sour_grapes]

When synthesizing any chemical that has two different enantiomers (i.e., has left-handed and right-handed versions), the most straightforwards pathways results in a racemic mixture, i.e., has a roughly 50% proportion of each. In general, the chemical reactions that favor one or the other enantiomers are more challenging. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enantiomer#Enantioselective_preparations).

The upshot is that a pure D or pure L version costs a lot more than a recemic mixture. I just took a glance at Alfa Aesar website, and the pure versions of malic acid were 10x the price of the racemic mixture.

Thus, I always expect that, to the extent to which malic acid is used for balancing acids, a racemic mixture will be used. I don't, of course, have proof of this. But I reckon that you can probably get the MLB bugs to eat half of any added malic.

 

[winemaker81]

When synthesizing any chemical that has two different enantiomers (i.e., has left-handed and right-handed versions), the most straightforwards pathways results in a racemic mixture, i.e., has a roughly 50% proportion of each. In general, the chemical reactions that favor one or the other enantiomers are more challenging. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enantiomer#Enantioselective_preparations).

The upshot is that a pure D or pure L version costs a lot more than a recemic mixture. I just took a glance at Alfa Aesar website, and the pure versions of malic acid were 10x the price of the racemic mixture.

Thus, I always expect that, to the extent to which malic acid is used for balancing acids, a racemic mixture will be used. I don't, of course, have proof of this. But I reckon that you can probably get the MLB bugs to eat half of any added malic.

That makes sense. Cost is a huge focus.

So ... MLB eats (at most) half the malic acid. In a chromatography test, this may appear as a failure. So ... the story that MLF doesn't work on kits becomes common, and to be fair, it's probably half true.

Add onto that the difficulty that many folks have in getting MLF to work? As the Professor said, the tale grew in the telling ...

 

[BarrelMonkey]

When synthesizing any chemical that has two different enantiomers (i.e., has left-handed and right-handed versions), the most straightforwards pathways results in a racemic mixture, i.e., has a roughly 50% proportion of each. In general, the chemical reactions that favor one or the other enantiomers are more challenging. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enantiomer#Enantioselective_preparations).

The upshot is that a pure D or pure L version costs a lot more than a recemic mixture. I just took a glance at Alfa Aesar website, and the pure versions of malic acid were 10x the price of the racemic mixture.

Thus, I always expect that, to the extent to which malic acid is used for balancing acids, a racemic mixture will be used. I don't, of course, have proof of this. But I reckon that you can probably get the MLB bugs to eat half of any added malic.

I think you're right, it's most likely the D/L form that is used for acid adjustment in winemaking (unless you specifically want it as a substrate for MLB). Enartis supplies both D/L malic acid and the pure L-enantiomer, but not the pure D-form.

Curiously, their price of the L and D/L forms is about the same, at least in bulk:

L-malic acid, 25kg for $425
D/L malic acid, 50lb for $450

I have no idea why they sell one form in metric and one in imperial. I'm guessing that although L-malic is as you say more expensive to synthesize, it can be isolated relatively cheaply from natural sources.