Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1325
Subject: Cider Digest #1325, 10 July 2006
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1325 10 July 2006
Forum for Discussion of Cider Issues
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Cider Digest faltering? (Cider Digest Admin)
RE: iced cider from juice ("Timothy")
Technical: Use of ProElif encapsulted yeast in sparkling perry - report ("...)
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
When subscribing, please include your name and a good address in the
message body unless you're sure your mailer generates them.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Cider Digest faltering?
From: cider-request@talisman.com (Cider Digest Admin)
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2006 22:03:35 -0600 (MDT)
Is the Cider Digest faltering, not meeting a need, failing in some way?
It's way down from the usual one-or-two a week, and even at that I've
pushed out some very slim digests just so that people don't forget it's
there. The entire month of June had only three skimpy digests.
(Don't reply just to bulk up the digest! But if you've got some relevant
thoughts, either share them with the digest or send me a note on the side
at the admin address, as appropriate.)
Dick
------------------------------
Subject: RE: iced cider from juice
From: "Timothy" <tboger111@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:23:07 -0400
These comments are in reference to Mr. Charles McGonegal recent writing.
If I understand the point that is being made, crystal fractionalization
of cider is NOT completely illegal based on his reference to the ATF
because it doesn't address apples.
Secondly my understanding is drinking "intensified" cider that under
went crystal fractionalization is NOT unhealthy because he engages in
the practice.
The last paragraph is confusing. Is this addressing labeling issues or
overall legality, and is that legality "gray" at best?
Understand my interest as a newbee on this subject is to make cider on a
small scale this fall for personal / noncommercial uses. Previous
writers stated that intensifying cider by crystal fractionalization was
unlawful and in fact unhealthy as it could cause cerebral palsy. These
issues put the breaks on my plans. But this recent writing by Mr.
McGonegal has renewed my interest assuming I am understanding him
correctly.
I wish someone would write a detailed article which addresses the
legality and health concerns of cider and its "intensified" product.
Tim Boger
------------------------------
Subject: Technical: Use of ProElif encapsulted yeast in sparkling perry - report
From: "McGonegal, Charles" <Charles.McGonegal@uop.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 08:41:25 -0500
With the Cider Net down for a bit, I thought I'd put my observations on
using ProElif yeast beads here on the CD (and generate a little traffic,
too)
Background: I commercially produce a champagne method sparkling perry
using a blend of market dessert pears (for now :-) - about 1000 bottles
per year. While my MC (methode champensoise) _cider_ is stable for 5-7
years, I'm finding my perry to be delicate. It seems to have a problem
with both hazes and volatile acidity (acetic acid) developing 6-9 months
after disgorging. It makes the perry very English-like, which
(unfortunately) isn't good for my local market. Un-dosaged bottles
don't suffer from the problem. I use a home-built gyropallet for
riddling. I haven't been pleased with how either available riddling
aids (one for hand riddling, one for machine riddling) work in my system
- - they both tend to leave narrow stripes of sediment on the sides of the
glass as the main body of lees descends to the bidule in the neck.
Machine-tuned adjuvant slides better, but doesn't settle out a second
time very well. So there are two problems I'm working on: poor riddling
and aging stability.
Tests: A) Use the relatively new ProElif yeast instead of EC1118 and
Adjuvant. ProElif is DV-10 (I believe) incapsulated in alginate beads.
It has been tried in cider in France. The yeast is live, but bonded in
the beads and can't escape. It's used by adding about a gram to a
sterile-filtered cuvee at bottling. Low sulfite cider and perry are
well within the manufacturer's suggested tolerances. Automated dosing is
still under development, I used a lab powder handling tool and dosed by
hand. I also ran light on the amount - about 0.5 gram/bottle, since I
could tolerate a longer tirage time (I aim for 4-5 months minimum). I
aim for about 6 volumes pressure. The manufacturer says upfront that
ProElif doesn't contribute lees-aging qualities, and if you want them,
get it in before bottling. B) Don't use either pear juice concentrate,
nor pear table wine in dosage. New dosage made from invert syrup and
pear spirits.
Observations:
Secondary Fermentation - sampled bottles peridically - went smoothly and
quickly, building full pressure in about 2 months.
Clarity - at disgorging time, the wine was brilliantly clear.
Riddling - takes _9 seconds_ by inverting the bottle. Instead of using
the gyropallet, I tool a tirage bin (20 bushel apple bin) out of the
cave, set an empty case on the top and simply inverted the bottles in
the case a bit before disgorging.
Disgorging - Hand a la vollee (on the fly) disgorging had to be adjusted
slightly. My old timing allowed the beads to roll back into the bottle.
My automatic a la vollee disgorger needed no ajustment. The yeast beads
tend to escapea bit, and they get every where. Even worse than the
bidules. And they stick to the floor.
Dosage - Less foaming on dosage addition than before.
Control - unintentional, but I found one bottle out of the 40 cases we
did Sat. that had no beads added. It was brilliantly clear, and I had
to look very carefuly to find a little wisp of sediment in the bottom.
It wasn't sparkling enough to blow out the bidule - but wasn't
completely still, either. Now I bottle under CO2 head pressure from
bottling tank to bottle filler (about 12psig). Given the low alcohol
(~6.5% ABV) and low sulfite level, I think that suggests my sterile
bottling went okay.
Organleptic - nice clean finish and taste. I think that the sterile
filtration leaves too few particles for good bubble nucleation. The
mousse and cordon are very noticably flatter and shorter lasting, and I
think the bubbles might be bigger. At the same time, it holds
carbonation longer sitting open, and foams less on dosage addition.
Opinion: I've very pleased with the instant-riddling and apparent lower
CO2 loss on disgorging and dosage than with the traditional yeast and
riddling aid. It's a bit more expensive, and took another person on the
bottling line (4 to 5) to measure and add the dose. But the riddling
quality was just _so_ much better. I'll be working on getting my mousse
(foam when poured) and cordon (the lingering ring of bubbles where the
wine surface meets the glass) back. I've got some idea to try next
year.
Pending: Did the new dosage work? Time will tell.
Charles McGonegal
AEppelTreow Winery
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1325
*************************
