My plan for 2017 wine from California grapes

[Johnd]

Don’t fear the lack of so2!
Now at 4 successful mlf’s, all of em coinnoculated vp-41. And held off all so2 additions on all of em until MLF completed. Even skipped so2 at crush since I was coinoculating.
I think learning by poor family old school winemaking practices taught me not to ever get hung up on so2-since it was never added by them. —as long as topped up seems to be plenty protection for course of mlf.

While it’s true that topping and sanitation are big helpers, time will eventually catch up to you. The Chileans that Jim struggled with were the same ones I struggled with. 4 months after AF, and no SO2, I finally chickened out and sulfited the wine. IIRC, Jim may have persisted longer with his. In the end, it led me to the co inoculation research, first attempt, and that’s what I’ve done since.

 

[Ajmassa]

While it’s true that topping and sanitation are big helpers, time will eventually catch up to you. The Chileans that Jim struggled with were the same ones I struggled with. 4 months after AF, and no SO2, I finally chickened out and sulfited the wine. IIRC, Jim may have persisted longer with his. In the end, it led me to the co inoculation research, first attempt, and that’s what I’ve done since.

Totally agree. I should have added *within reason* to my reply. Because skipping so2 altogether combined with coinoculating kept my timeframes no more than a month without so2 protection. If the MLF started dragging out for multiple months would def bring me out of my comfort level.
Having said that, I have already made the decision to NOT skip so2 at crush anymore. (I’m still on the “coinoculation train” and no plans of getting off.) MLF went great but I experienced issues with fermentation finishing because of natural yeast issues. Finding that so2 “sweet spot” to max benefit AF as well as MLF is an art, and I’m still figuring it out. Thinking just minimal 10-15 ppm at crush for fall. But for spring grapes that arrive with So2 pads I will still skip. I tested those levels before AF and there was already more than enough in there. I’d have to check my notes, but I believe it was already around 20-30 ppm after crush.

 

[mainshipfred]

I know this came up before and think I remember it being a no no but would washing the grapes remove the S02 from the pads or is it already sunk into the skins?

 

[Ajmassa]

I know this came up before and think I remember it being a no no but would washing the grapes remove the S02 from the pads or is it already sunk into the skins?

Right? I mean, It’s just pads over the lugs. But Regardless of the benefits, washing grapes was said to water down the grapes. Messing with the Brix, and the acid levels. According to those threads at least. Plus I think those so2 pads worked to my benefit.

 

[mainshipfred]

Right? I mean, It’s just pads over the lugs. But Regardless of the benefits, washing grapes was said to water down the grapes. Messing with the Brix, and the acid levels. According to those threads at least. Plus I think those so2 pads worked to my benefit.

The only reason I asked is my local grapes batch had no S02 added and MLF started almost immediately post fermentation.

 

[Ajmassa]

The only reason I asked is my local grapes batch had no S02 added and MLF started almost immediately post fermentation.

FWIW the so2 pad didnt even seem to be a speed bump at all for the MLF. I just checked my notes.
The Chilean cab lugs purchased with so2 pads. Free so2 checked after crush was 30-35 free ppm.(using titrets)
I inoculated Vp-41 after after lag phase of yeast inoculation. Took a chroma test at day 10- and showed already almost finished. (So2 was 25-30 free ppm at this point). 2nd chroma test at 3.5 weeks showed definite completion.

 

[jgmann67]

Received my MLB and nutrient from MoreWine! today. Going to "give 'em the beans" tonight and hopefully see some MLF action starting tomorrow or the next.

 

[mainshipfred]

I used MBR 31 which has a lower tolerance for alcohol and S02. Used it because the winery told me it has a higher Diacetyl influence. Still, after learning a little the past few days about MLF I think (within reason) I need to keep the sulfite level on the low side. The total S02 ceiling for the MBR 31 is 40 ppm.
I believe the ceiling for the VP 41 that most use is 60 ppm.

 

[jgmann67]

Dosed last night and moved the wine to a room that's 70* F. Got a bit of foaming due to the nutrient, I think. Didn't lose anything really. And now... we wait.

 

[Boatboy24]

I just checked my notes.
The Chilean cab lugs purchased with so2 pads. Free so2 checked after crush was 30-35 free ppm.(using titrets)

Free SO2 @ 30-35ppm? Did you add any on your own or was that the way they arrived? That doesn't account for bound SO2, so your total could have been in excess of 50ppm.

 

[Ajmassa]

Free SO2 @ 30-35ppm? Did you add any on your own or was that the way they arrived? That doesn't account for bound SO2, so your total could have been in excess of 50ppm.

Yep. I added none of my own. And yes, the tests were for free so2 - not total. Although I do take those #’s with a grain of salt too. 30ppm could easily be +or- 10ppm. Using the glass titrets. Even tho not the most accurate, they at least give me a general idea.
I forgot to test my fall grape’s so2 at crush for a comparison. But when I tested before stabilizing after MLF I got 25 free ppm. Used fermcalc to calculate addition to get to 70 free ppm (3.9ph) Using titret to check level after addition showed 70 free ppm- right on the money. —— in other words, the titrets were at least consistent and have been accurate enough for my needs so far. And the spring’s so2 pads showed plenty of protection to warrant no additions at crush.

 

[Ajmassa]

——-I realize >50 total ppm seems high. But that’s what i got. I did a 2nd test to confirm (always do). My thoughts are that with VP41 (which states the tolerance at 50-60 total so2) combined with a very early coinoculation at 24 hr w/ acti-ml/opti malo feeding PLUS properly feeding yeast’s nutrients preventing them from competing for nutes off each other- was essentially the most ideal conditions possible for MLF to take off quick and finish quick in spite of the higher so2 via shipping pads.
RC212 Yeast was used. MLF seemed much smoother than when MLF’d with BM4x4. (Tho could be 100 other variables). And actually those skins were used on a juice pail righter after pressing. So, a simultaneous yeast and malo inoculation. AF at sg .997 at day 4. Chroma test at day 6 was arguably already finished. Juice pail so2 measured ~35 FREE ppm initially. (Remember that grain of salt for those titrets tho!)

 

[jgmann67]

I moved the 3 carboys into another room where the ambient temps are about 5* higher than in the wine room. That should help a little.

Tiny bubbles have returned. Let’s hope it means something is actually happening now.

 

[ceeaton]

I moved the 3 carboys into another room where the ambient temps are about 5* higher than in the wine room. That should help a little.

Tiny bubbles have returned. Let’s hope it means something is actually happening now.

Maybe we can aim for a test the second week of January, that should give it some time to show some malic reduction so you can make a decision on whether to "throw in the towel" and add some K-meta.

I really do think the SO2 being introduced from the environment the grapes are "held" in before being put on the ship and during shipment with the "pads" is our major issue with MLF. Maybe next Spring someone can test the total SO2 on the grapes we receive so we can be a little bit more knowledgeable in trying to pin down issues with MLF and Chilean grown grapes. It would be nice to know if that is a major factor in all of this or not, but until we test we are just throwing out our best guess, and at best it is a guess.

 

[jgmann67]

Maybe we can aim for a test the second week of January, that should give it some time to show some malic reduction so you can make a decision on whether to "throw in the towel" and add some K-meta.

I really do think the SO2 being introduced from the environment the grapes are "held" in before being put on the ship and during shipment with the "pads" is our major issue with MLF. Maybe next Spring someone can test the total SO2 on the grapes we receive so we can be a little bit more knowledgeable in trying to pin down issues with MLF and Chilean grown grapes. It would be nice to know if that is a major factor in all of this or not, but until we test we are just throwing out our best guess, and at best it is a guess.

Agreed. Mid January is good.

Next season, I'm doing a coinoculation to see if that works better.

 

[Johnd]

I really do think the SO2 being introduced from the environment the grapes are "held" in before being put on the ship and during shipment with the "pads" is our major issue with MLF.

I’m 100% in agreement. After 4 months, 3 packets of VP41, nutrients, perfect temps and pH, there’s nothing else it could be. I had my Chileans c/d”d before freezing / shipping to me and specifically ordered that no sulfite be added, and assume they did it right, it’s the only variable.

When I inquired at M&M / Lanza / Musto, I was told that the grape lugs are shipped in sulfite gas filled bags, with sulfite soaked pads, in a refrigerated, sulfite gas filled shipping container. They’re well protected to get here in good shape, but some sulfite is certainly absorbed in the process.

 

[mainshipfred]

But Regardless of the benefits, washing grapes was said to water down the grapes. Messing with the Brix, and the acid levels. According to those threads at least.

I don't think I have ever learned so much in a single year on a single topic that I have learned about making wine this past year and 90+% came from this forum. With all due respect to everyone's comments, which I take to heart, there are a few things I have to question even though some appear to be the opinion of the vast majority.

1. The idea that washing grapes interfers with the brix and acid levels is kind of hard to accept. I've read that not only the time of year but also the time of day which grapes are harvested will have an affect on the quality of the juice. It could be time after a rain, morning dew, temperature or something else, I just don't know. But my thoughts on this are, a quick shower of the grapes and maybe time allowed to dry would not greatly affect the brix or acid levels. It might not do anything to the sulfites if they are absorbed into the skins but could potentially remove any chemicals or pesticides the vineyard may have used.

2. Should or could kits go through MLF? Kit juice is prepared to have a long shelf life. Since it's kept such a secrets there is no telling what the manufacturers do to preserve the juice. Could be high sulfite levels, sorbates, or some other pasteurization method, any of which could prevent MLF. With that being said the thought MLF'ing kits causing an out of balance flabby wine, maybe so, but we tweek our wines all the time, adding or removing acid, sweeting or back sweeting, tannin additions, ect. Why couldn't, if it were possible, a kit go through MLF?

3. Probably a lot of this pertains to #2 but since the likelyhood of a kits ability to go through MLF, I'm not totally convinced a barrel can't be used for both.

AJ, your highlighted comment above is what prompted me to write this. I hope neither one of us gets in trouble.

 

[ceeaton]

2. Should or could kits go through MLF? Kit juice is prepared to have a long shelf life. Since it's kept such a secrets there is no telling what the manufacturers do to preserve the juice. Could be high sulfite levels, sorbates, or some other pasteurization method, any of which could prevent MLF. With that being said the thought MLF'ing kits causing an out of balance flabby wine, maybe so, but we tweek our wines all the time, adding or removing acid, sweeting or back sweeting, tannin additions, ect. Why couldn't, if it were possible, a kit go through MLF?

I have never done MLF on a kit because, since I'm family rich and monetarily challenged, and I don't want to dump $130 kit down the drain for the sake of an experiment. Though I would be interested in following a thread where someone documented their experience with MLF on a kit, all for science of course. Fred, I think you are the perfect winemaker to embark on such a journey, in the sake of science, of course!

 

[cmason1957]

Tim Vandergrift (if you don't know that name, Google him, he is the Godfather of kits) one said that kits are acid balanced with mostly malic acid and then have something added that would inhibit malolactic fermentation. If you could get Mlf to start you will end up with a very flabby low acid wine. If someone does decide to try to do this, use a very low end kit and only waste $50-75 not $135 or so.

 

[mainshipfred]

I have never done MLF on a kit because, since I'm family rich and monetarily challenged, and I don't want to dump $130 kit down the drain for the sake of an experiment. Though I would be interested in following a thread where someone documented their experience with MLF on a kit, all for science of course. Fred, I think you are the perfect winemaker to embark on such a journey, in the sake of science, of course!

I did try with one gallon of a six gallon kit and nothing happened. As mentioned I would guess it's the preservation method used to add shelf life to the juice.