12 replies to this topic

[NorthernWiner]

If you've ever used the the formula {Brix x 0.55} to estimate potential alcohol, you may want to rethink that. For years I used that formula. Then I talked to professional winemakers who thought the conversion factor was closer to 0.59, so that's what I used. Now this guy says it could actually be as high as 0.63...

http://www.newworldwinemakerblog.com/the-conversion-factor-issue/

[bzac]

Interesting , I've also been using .59 .

it kind of splits the diffence . I've also been buying grapes from cooler parts of washing ton the last 3 years , looking for 22.5-23.5 but I know lots of people who consider anything under 25 under ripe.

this could explain some of the hotter than expected wines out there. and the alcohol tollerent yeasts on the market today

[Crazy Run Ranch]

I've done lab analysis on quite a few wines over a few years. For me, .59 for reds is the average figure (excluding Zin). But I can see the numbers mentioned in the article since I ferment open top and I tend to ferment on the warm side. I have had a couple Zins much higher that I chalk up to dehydrated sugar common in Zin. Going slightly off topic, alcohol levels seem to be a hot topic lately. The SF Chronicle is now publishing alc levels in their reviews. I recently went to a Pinot tasting "In Pursuit of Balance" which seemed to really mean under 14% alcohol. There were some tasty wines for sure, but there were also unbalanced wines of the green variety too. I like the idea of lower alcohol wines but not if people starting making wine making decisions based on keeping it low because people are making buying decisions based on alc level.

[bret]

That was helpful, as I had always gone by the 0.55 conversion. Thanks for sharing.

-Bret

[Doyle]

I have always used 0.59, but when I started doing whole berry ferments it became more difficult to get accurate brix readings. I found myself pulling big samples and crushing them up and letting them sit for a day. This last year wasn't a big problem as most of my grapes came in relatively low so I didn't do any water additions.

[West Seattle Winery]

In Enology we were taught the range varies from .55 - .65 and my instructor used .58 as his number. However in 09 I experienced .61 when I ended up with a 14.7% ABV Viognier. It's a full bodied damn good viognier... but I was certainly surprised to see that result from ETS.

(there is always human error too... however that is the only wine from 2009 that was a lot different than my original calculations... so I don't blame the hydrometer... but I could have marked 24 brix when it was really 24.3 or something)

[Crazy Run Ranch]

This last year wasn't a big problem as most of my grapes came in relatively low so I didn't do any water additions.

No kidding Doyle. I haven't done a water addition since 2007. Mostly that's a good thing. Except for a couple 22.somethings

[hz3gzy]

I've done lab analysis on quite a few wines over a few years. For me, .59 for reds is the average figure (excluding Zin). But I can see the numbers mentioned in the article since I ferment open top and I tend to ferment on the warm side. I have had a couple Zins much higher that I chalk up to dehydrated sugar common in Zin. Going slightly off topic, alcohol levels seem to be a hot topic lately. The SF Chronicle is now publishing alc levels in their reviews. I recently went to a Pinot tasting "In Pursuit of Balance" which seemed to really mean under 14% alcohol. There were some tasty wines for sure, but there were also unbalanced wines of the green variety too. I like the idea of lower alcohol wines but not if people starting making wine making decisions based on keeping it low because people are making buying decisions based on alc level.

Crazy, Although I have heard about wine makers performing open top fermentations, I have never done one myself. Is that the intent, to remove alcohol? Don't you worry about bugs getting in there?

[West Seattle Winery]

I recently went to a Pinot tasting "In Pursuit of Balance" which seemed to really mean under 14% alcohol. There were some tasty wines for sure, but there were also unbalanced wines of the green variety too. I like the idea of lower alcohol wines but not if people starting making wine making decisions based on keeping it low because people are making buying decisions based on alc level.

I wonder if the added emphasis on this has anything to do with the 2010 growing season and the expectation of lower alcohol wines hitting the retail shelves in the coming months / year.

[Crazy Run Ranch]

Crazy, Although I have heard about wine makers performing open top fermentations, I have never done one myself. Is that the intent, to remove alcohol? Don't you worry about bugs getting in there?

I do cover the bins at the beginning and end of the fermentation. I open it when fermentation starts going good and plenty of CO2 is coming out. Once the fruit flies start getting interested again I cover it.

[Crazy Run Ranch]

I wonder if the added emphasis on this has anything to do with the 2010 growing season and the expectation of lower alcohol wines hitting the retail shelves in the coming months / year.

In this case I don't think that was the reason. Especially since Pinot Noir didn't necessarily have any issues getting ripe in 2010. This particular tasting was organized by a SF sommelier (RN74 resteraunt in SF) who thinks California wine has too high of alcohol and doesn't purchase Pinot for his list over 14%. He's more of a fan of Burgundian Pinot and its supposed lower alc. Like I said, I don't mind lower alcohol wines its just not a "shopping point" for me. Considering that labeling laws allow a 1% tolerance over 14%, a wine labeled 13.5% could easily be 14.5%. And also, if you drink a whole bottle of 14.5% wine instead of 13.5, you have consumed a whopping .25 oz. more alcohol. Drink 1.7 oz. less 14.5% wine and its the same exact amount of alcohol.

[West Seattle Winery]

Pinot Noir didn't necessarily have any issues getting ripe in 2010

I guess I didn't realize that California Pinot didn't struggle. Our friends in OR had a really bad year... and coming off of a marginal year in 09 its been rough growing Pinot in Oregon lately (or at least for their location).

[Crazy Run Ranch]

I guess I didn't realize that California Pinot didn't struggle. Our friends in OR had a really bad year... and coming off of a marginal year in 09 its been rough growing Pinot in Oregon lately (or at least for their location).

Don't get me wrong, '10 was a tough year here. But Pinot usually isn't that late to pick so many could hang longer and still ripen. I think it was a tougher vintage on those that normally need half of October to ripen. The mountain vineyards, coastal extremes, and late varietals in cooler locations had a tough time. My point was really that I don't think there will be a across the board drop in alcohol for 2010 Pinot.