RJ Spagnols Yeast Selection

[BarBarrique]

Forgive me. I have made side by side test batches of limited edition South African shiraz cab and super Tuscan - one with EC-1118 and one with ICV-d254. In both cases the yeast substitute was noticeable, durable (over two years) and an improvement. I have since substituted ICV-d254 for rosso grande eccelente, limited edition Nero D'Avola, red mountain cab, walla walla cab merlot, South African shiraz, Barolo, and amarone without incident. I have also used bdx for Amarone, MT for stag's Leap Merlot and LE triumph, RC-212 for Sonoma pinot noir, and bm45 for Brunello. No fermentation issues of any kind.

My standard practice is to hydrate the yeast with go-ferm and and one addition of Fermaid K to the must 24 hours after yeast pitch and a second addition at 1/3 sugar depletion.

For beginners I would suggest you not attempt any modifications until you have some success under your belt. I made two dozen kits before I started experimenting with yeasts. Of course, there is nothing wrong with doing the kits exactly per instructions and you should be able to make very good wine that way.

Greetings terroirdejeroir;

A healthy debate about winemaking practices is always worthwhile. My post may have sounded a bit like a stern warning against straying from the kit manufacturers instructions, but in fact I was more concerned that the thread seemed to imply that substituting yeasts would always improve the results. As you note; new winemakers should enjoy successfully making wine by following the kit instructions.
I see that you have experimented with using different yeasts on the same kits, and, for these kits you have found that you prefer the substituted yeast. I guess the question is: would all winemakers agree that the substituted yeast resulted in a better wine. Maybe they would, but does this mean that for wines that you did not do comparisons for; would the wine always be improved by substituting any kits manufacture's supplied yeast?
I personally don't know the answer, but I am reluctant to encourage people to jeopardize the results of their wine kit by implying that yeast substitution will always improve their wine. I will note that the tweaking thread that was formerly a "sticky" noted that yeast substitutions were not particularly successful in improving the results in a wine kit. My principle concern when making a kit is complete fermentation, and, for this purpose 1118 is a champion.
After making kits for some time most folks are going to want to experiment, I know that I did. I guess what I want to say is: when you experiment, you have to accept the fact that your "tweak" may not result in an improvement, but in fact, the resulting wine may be worse than it might have been if you had simply followed the instructions.

Cheers;

Bar

 

[jsiddall]

This is an interesting discussion. Full disclosure: I have never made the same of anything twice so I have no comparison data to add.

However, my impression from what I have read is that while EC-1118 is known for many of its favorable qualities (high alcohol and sulfite tolerance, compact lees, wide temperature range, low nutrient requirements, low sulfur production etc.) it is not known for enhancing flavor or aroma. I expect if you can take care of the fussiness of other yeasts -- things that likely make them unsuitable for the kit market -- you will end up with a better wine.

 

[wineforfun]

but I am reluctant to encourage people to jeopardize the results of their wine kit by implying that yeast substitution will always improve their wine.

Exactly the reason behind my initial question. Is a person "guaranteed" a better product in the end with the yeast substitution. And of course that begs the question "what is a better product or exactly what are you looking to achieve?".
I would suppose if you made numerous kits annually, then the yeast substitution, and other substitutions for that matter, would be a worthy test.

Thanks to all for the discussion/insight.

 

[Hordak]

I've done a ton of internet scouring lately for my beer brewing endeavors and that has solidified that as we know yeast choice has a pretty remarkable hand in how our end product will turn out. There are a number of posts and videos in regards to beer and doing different yeast experiments on the same batch, just like a few of you have done. For reds I would love to do a three way EC1118, RC 212 and BM4X4 comparison on the same kit or juice pail. That's a little more involved or tricky though as you need three then two gallon carboys, not easy to source for me anyways in Canada.
Probably easier to do the two way comparo like RC212 vs BM4X4 on same batch and etc and then get some good wine drinkers together and do some blind taste testes and make some good tasting notes.
But I'm with "wineforfun" I don't think one yeast will be "better" over another it will just have characteristics that you prefer. Hence why I have almost been exclusively using RC 212 on my wines this fall cause of the "fruit forward" tasting notes some of you have described which is my preference in wines at this time.
And Coleman - thanks for the tips on BM4X4 that is crucial for all of us to know for when we try our hands at different yeasts.

Cory

 

[globalnavigator]

Newbie here, but I somehow have 2 kits of RJS Super Tuscan. The kits come with the EC-1118 yeast. I don't want to overthink this, or make it crazy, but in looking at what seems to be an authoritative yeast guide here, it seems that EC-1118 is preferred for whites, not reds. As an experiment, I was thinking that I would make one kit using the supplied EC-1118, and the other using one of their "highly recommended" yeasts. Since I believe the Super Tuscan kit has sangiovese, I might go with BM 4x4. It looks like a low-risk choice that may give me some added positive attributes.

Thoughts, comments, or suggestions?

 

[sour_grapes]

Thoughts, comments, or suggestions?

Personally, I think you nailed it. (Inveterate yast swapper here.) Doing two kits, one with the supplied yeast, one with a "custom" yeast, sounds like a fabulous idea to see if yeasts make a difference. I have always wanted to do this, but not enough to actually make two identical kits. As for BM4x4, a fine, fine choice. It is reputed to have the good qualities of BM45, and yet be foolproof. So I think you have made a sagacious plan!

 

[Boatboy24]

Yep, what Paul said.

I've done that kit twice. Once with the 1118 and once with the BM4X4 (just bottled that one). Unfortunately, they weren't done at the same time so I won't have a great rating of the two side by side. But I did save one bottle of the EC1118 batch for comparing.