Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Mead Lovers Digest #1363
Subject: Mead Lover's Digest #1363, 24 January 2008
From: mead-request@talisman.com
Mead Lover's Digest #1363 24 January 2008
Forum for Discussion of Mead Making and Consuming
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Re: What is it that oxidizes? ("Dan McFeeley")
Re: Fermenters for small batches (Carrie Sundra)
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1362, 21 January 2008 (Dennis Myhand)
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1362, 21 January 2008 ("Launce Haught")
Re: What is it that oxidizes? (Vuarra)
Re: Fermenters for small batches (MeadGuild@aol.com)
Re: What is it that oxidizes? (MeadGuild@aol.com) (Dick Dunn)
Re: Fermenters for small batches (Mail Box)
Re: storage (Mail Box)
bottling hydrometer (looking for) (Dick Dunn)
you're now irrelevant (dan@geer.org)
Re: storage (Dick Dunn)
Re: What is it that oxidizes? ("John Mealey")
NOTE: Digest appears when there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to mead@talisman.com.
Use mead-request@talisman.com for [un]subscribe/admin requests.
Digest archives and FAQ are available at www.talisman.com/mead
A searchable archive is at http://www.gotmead.com/mldarchives.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: What is it that oxidizes?
From: "Dan McFeeley" <mcfeeley@keynet.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:16:46 -0600
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, in MLD 1362, Dick Adams asked:
>What is it that oxidizes? I keep asking this question and
>have yet to get enough explanations that are consistent
>with each other.
>In beer, it must be either the malt or the alcohol.
>In wine, it must be either the grapes or the alcohol.
>In Mead, it must be either the honey or the alcohol.
I can give you a quick answer off the top of my head, but
the actual picture is complex.
Depending on the varietal honey, there is plant
matter, similar to that found in white wines, that
can oxidize (maybe I can look this up later, at
the moment I can't recall where I may have this
filed).
What makes matters complicated is that honey
is known to contain anti-oxidant material. Check
here:
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc98/9_12_98/bob1.htm
On alcohol -- oxidation produces acetaldehyde.
Hope this brief response is helpful!
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><>
Dan McFeeley
"Meon an phobail a thogail trid an chultur"
(The people's spirit is raised through culture)
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fermenters for small batches
From: Carrie Sundra <csundra@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:23:02 -0800 (PST)
I use plastic for the initial fermentation - easier to clean. Food-grade
1.5 gallon or 2-gallon buckets with lids can be found at stores like Smart &
Final (or a homebrew supply place if you have one in your area), you just
have to drill a hole in the top for the stopper. I do end up sealing the
outside of the lid with caulk, because I find that they leak a little too
much otherwise.
For racking & aging, I use glass. I tried to find a cheap source of empty
1 gallon glass containers -- it turns out it's much cheaper to buy them
full of apple juice at the grocery store! $5-$6 at Trader Joe's will get
you a perfect 1 gallon glass fermenter.
- -Carrie Sundra
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1362, 21 January 2008
From: Dennis Myhand <dmyhand@suddenlink.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:14:46 -0600
About "Some Numbers:"
Which of these decreases in sg numbers would yield the highest amount of
alcohol content? I hate to put it in such crude terms but I am looking
for "kick" as well as taste. Also, which yeast would you use for a dry
Mead? Thanks, Dennis Myhand
mead-request@talisman.com wrote:
> Mead Lover's Digest #1362 21 January 2008
> Subject: Re: some numbers
> From: MeadGuild@aol.com
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:57:17 EST
>
> dan@geer.org blessed us with the following numbers
> indicating the decrease in specific gravity seen over
> the time interval from pitching to bottling, by yeast.
>
>> yeast SG decrease
>> ------------------------------------
>> EC-1118 0.102
>> 71B-1122 0.100
>> K1-V1116 0.095
>> D47 0.088
>> WLP720 0.085
>> Montrachet 0.079
>> --------------------------------
>> average 0.090
>
> I thank Dan very much not just for sharing these numbers
> with us, but also for the diligence in collecting them.
>
> EC-1118, my yeast of choice, in first place came as no
> surprise to me. But 71B-1122 being only 0.002 behind
> EC-1118 and 0.005 ahead of K1V-1116 did surprise me.
>
> Dick
> - --
> Richard D. Adams, CPA (retired)
> Moderator: misc.taxes.moderated
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1362, 21 January 2008
From: "Launce Haught" <launcelot@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:44:43 -0800
Re:
Subject: Fermenters for small batches
From: ashford@whisperpc.com
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:37:14 -0800 (PST)
I'm getting ready to make a few small (~1 gal) batches, and was wondering
about the fermenter. I think that something around 1-1/4 to 1-1/2 gallons
should provide some headroom for foaming, and some space in the bottom for
the spent yeast.
I found 5 Liter Erlenmeyer flasks and Florence flasks at similar prices.
http://morebeer.com/view_product/7955/
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280109345862
The Erlenmeyer will be more stable (physically), but I think the Florence
should be easier to rack from (narrower bottom).
Does anyone have experience with this?
Thanks.
Peter Ashford
I would be a bit careful, my first couple of meads were not particularly
vigorous, however every melomel I have done to date has foamed like a dog
with rabies, I would use something with a wider mouth for a primary.
Unless you are not married/involved I got in *SO* much trouble when I blew
foam all over the kitchen...
- --Launce
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What is it that oxidizes?
From: Vuarra <vuarra@yahoo.ca>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:17:36 -0800 (PST)
Dick:
While you are correct that honey does not spoil, must will. The reason
that honey does not spoil is that the amount of sugar in it is so
high that osmotic pressure will not let active agents live -- botulism
spores are inactive, which is why it is not a good idea to let your under
one-year-olds have honey in any source. When you dilute the honey to make
must, it allows the various critters to start to live -- like yeast.
I would say that your experiment shows that it is not a short term ethanol
decomposition that is happening, though you may have had some acetobacter
introduced.
Vuarra
If you want my views of history, then there's something you should know,
The three men I admire most are Curly, Larry, Moe.
(Jim Steinman, "Everything Louder Than Everything Else")
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fermenters for small batches
From: MeadGuild@aol.com
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:21:32 EST
> I'm getting ready to make a few small (~1 gal) batches, and was
> wondering about the fermenter. I think that something around
>1-1/4 to 1-1/2 gallons should provide some headroom for foaming,
> and some space in the bottom for the spent yeast.
>
> I found 5 Liter Erlenmeyer flasks and Florence flasks at similar prices.
>
> http://morebeer.com/view_product/7955/
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280109345862
>
> The Erlenmeyer will be more stable (physically), but I think the Florence
> should be easier to rack from (narrower bottom).
>
> Does anyone have experience with this?
A few years ago I was looking for anything I could use as a fermenter
that was greater than a gallon and no more than two gallons. I found
4 liter Gallo wine bottles. Full they cost $8 at the time, but I don't drink
wine. So I put the wine in 1 liter plastic bottles and gave them away.
One day I was at Target and saw a large mouth two gallon glass
container with a lid for around $20. But it won't take an airlock.
Dick
- --
Richard D. Adams, CPA (retired)
Moderator: misc.taxes.moderated
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What is it that oxidizes? (MeadGuild@aol.com)
From: rcd@talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:29:20 -0700 (MST)
Dick Adams (MeadGuild@aol.com) wrote:
> What is it that oxidizes?
> I keep asking this question and have yet to get enough explanations that
> are consistent with each other.
> In beer, it must be either the malt or the alcohol.
> In wine, it must be either the grapes or the alcohol.
> In Mead, it must be either the honey or the alcohol.
Well, it's sort of one or the other or both or some other stuff! The
simple answer is that it's not simple.
At the very outset, one of the complications is that when we say "oxidized"
we mean various things. Yes, beer or wine may oxidize, but the flavor of
an oxidized beer is roughly "wet cardboard" where with a wine it's more
like "bad sherry". Very different flavors; although they're both oxidation
it's different stuff being oxidized.
> So I took a liter of vodka and infused it with 180 seconds of oxygen in
> a one gallon jug and let it sit for three months. I had a friend taste
> the oxygenated vodka and a fresh bottle of the same vodka. He found
> no difference. Was three months long enough? Were his taste buds not
> sensitive enough?
This was a sensible test, but the point lies elsewhere. Pure alcohol
- -will- oxidize, but in general it's too stable to oxidize without help.
This is why spirits--vodka as you tested, but also brandy, whiskey, etc.--
don't spoil in bottle.
...
> So is oxidation only a problem with Melomels,
> Braggots, and Open Category Meads?
No, also a problem with traditionals (depending on treatment in all cases,
of course).
> Does anyone know of an academic in field of brewing who can give us an
> explanation based on empirical research?
Well...it just so happens...
I asked Andrew Lea about this. He's a food chemist; he's been dealing with
cider for (not sure) 35+ years now. His responses follow (edited slightly)
with my notes in [...] There's some difficult chemistry in this, but I
think most of us can get the general sense of it...nevertheless, Dick, I
believe you can see that you've asked a good, simple question for which
the full answer is vexingly complicated!
| I think the key thing that happens in all fermented beverages is
| oxidation of ethanol to ethanal (acetaldehyde). On the face of it this
| is chemically unlikely since ethanol is stable to aerial oxidation quite
| indefinitely on its own (and spirits do not oxidise). But the presence
| of trace metals plus low molecular weight polyphenols eg phenolic acids
| from the fruit material plus aerial oxygen is sufficient to produce
| peroxide radicals which convert the ethanol to acetaldehyde (this was
| shown by Singleton[1] many years ago). Paradoxically the more polyphenols a
| drink contains eg BS[2] cider or red wine, the more robust it tends to be
| against oxidation. This is because the remaining larger polyphenols (eg
| the tannins not the phenolic acids) absorb the continuously generated
| peroxide radicals and tend to become cross linked and larger on account
| of this (hence the tannin deposits in aged red wines). (The acetaldehyde
| can also play a direct part in tannin cross-linking and so, if formed,
| will also be absorbed).
|
| According to Ribereau Gayon just a few ppm of free acetaldehyde is
| sufficient to give 'flatness' to a wine even if the other aroma
| components remain unchanged. If true, this is a physiological
| suppression mechanism on our taste receptors, quite well known in the
| food field eg the flavor suppressing effect of TCA (trichoroanisole)
| even when not at high enough levels to cause an overt 'cork taint'.
|
| A secondary effect is the oxidation of other fruit or cereal-based
| components by similar mechanisms. I note that FBP[3] refers to the well
| known cardboard nonenal aroma of oxidised beer. This is another aldehyde
| but produced by oxidative cleavage of fatty acids. Wines / ciders /
| (and I guess meads) tend to be lower in these fatty acids than wort but
| there will be enough of them to be a potential problem at the ppb level;
| also carotenoids and waxes from fruit skin can act as oxidisable
| materials especially if they contain 'double bonds' and can epoxidise
| and cleave (and nearly all of them do).
|
| Another possible effect (although I have not seen it written anywhere)
| is that some desirable aromas may be due to tiny (ppt) levels of reduced
| sulfur compounds (this is of course known for Sauvignon Blanc where it
| is a varietal character). When oxygen is admitted these will be oxidised
| fairly speedily to less potent forms and hence some flavour is lost
| there. The area of sulfur chemistry in beverages is hugely complicated...
|
| Finally there are the products eg sherry, madeira, 'vins jaunes' where
| oxidation is a key player in the flavour and some of the compounds
| concerned which have a caramelised note eg sotolon can come either from
| thermal routes (as in molasses) or from alternative condensation
| reactions between keto acids and acetaldehyde. There the acetaldehyde,
| once formed, plays the part of a reactive intermediate which goes on to
| initiate other chemical processes. Of course if this happens in the
| wrong wine style it is a fault.
|
| I cannot speak for meads specifically but I imagine that the same
| mechanisms take place, depending on the fruit component (if any) but
| interestingly depending on trace pro-oxidant materials in honey from
| different sources.
| ...
| Incidentally some meads will almost certainly contain phenolics even if
| they have see no fruit. The honey from some plants contains specific
| phenolics from the pollen. This has been used with some success in
| authenticity / traceability studies. And there's always the chance of
| phenolic carry-over from propolis (which is almost always gathered from
| poplars in temperate climates) - the phenolics there and the benzoic
| acid are believed to be the active constituents apart from the physical
| attributes of the resin itself.
|
| I'm not sure if there are some specific and unique attributes of all
| honey which derive from bee biochemistry and might relate to oxidation
| (eg around the gluconic acid issue). I'll pass on that one for now.
[Can Dan M pick up that last point?]
[1] Vernon Singleton at UC Davis
[2] BS == bittersweet, made from apples specific for cider which are high
in tannin (but, coincidentally here, low in acidity)
[3] FBP == Fermented Beverage Production, a standard reference for the
industry
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fermenters for small batches
From: Mail Box <mail-box@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:44:23 -0500
> From: ashford@whisperpc.com
> Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:37:14 -0800 (PST)
>
> I'm getting ready to make a few small (~1 gal) batches, and was wondering
> about the fermenter. I think that something around 1-1/4 to 1-1/2 gallons
> should provide some headroom for foaming, and some space in the bottom for
> the spent yeast.
>
> I found 5 Liter Erlenmeyer flasks and Florence flasks at similar prices.
>
> http://morebeer.com/view_product/7955/
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280109345862
>
> The Erlenmeyer will be more stable (physically), but I think the Florence
> should be easier to rack from (narrower bottom).
>
> Does anyone have experience with this?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter Ashford
Peter,
That's an enormous price to pay for a small volume fermenter. You
should consider looking for a 3 gallon carboy, typically selling for
about $15-18US.
It's perfectly suitable for a 1 gallon batch, being even easier to work
with than a 1 gallon glass cider jug. And it gives you some room for
growth since it'll accommodate up to about a 2.5 gallon batch. You can
do your bulk aging in the 1 gallon jugs, to minimize your ullage.
Cheers,
Ken Taborek
------------------------------
Subject: Re: storage
From: Mail Box <mail-box@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:46:36 -0500
> From: dan@geer.org
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:34:07 -0500
[snipped]
> I note in passing that storing cardboard boxes loaded
> with bottles on their sides does nothing but collapse
> the boxes, and that all wine boxes recovered from
> merchants have the tops entirely removed.
>
> - --dan
That may be true in high touch commercial wine selling establishments,
but my "wine rack" consisting of a row of boxes turned on their sides
and stacked three high says that it doesn't have to be the case for the
home wine/mead maker. It's about 3 years old in its current location,
and some/most of the boxes made the move from my prior residence. No
collapsing.
And yes, I have several more conventional wine racks. But the boxes are
still needed for the overflow...
Cheers,
Ken Taborek
------------------------------
Subject: bottling hydrometer (looking for)
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:02:37 -0700
Anybody know where to find a proper bottling hydrometer? By this I mean a
narrow-range hydrometer with a long scale, such that it's easy to discern
single-point (0.001) changes. It's useful for gauging the common slow
crawl at the end of fermentation; it's mainly for bottling time because the
narrow range means that the initial must (or wort) is off the scale.
Williams' Brewing has carried "bottling hydrometers" for some time; however
they changed them in recent years. Used to be the range was 0.980-1.020.
The current ones are 1.000-1.040: same 40-point range, but placed
differently. Not having part of the range under 1.000 makes a world of
difference for the end-game for cider or mead. I could live without
0.980-0.990; it's the loss of 0.990-1.000 that matters.
(I've still got one of the old style...but hydrometers are not forever.)
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Subject: you're now irrelevant
From: dan@geer.org
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:29:48 -0500
Ah, what the bread machine did for home baking
can now be done for home winemaking -- just pour
all the stuff in one end and wait for the fully
industrialized product to emerge from the other.
Not cheap, mind you...
See this: http://personalwinemaking.com/index.aspx
Best,
- --dan
------------------------------
Subject: Re: storage
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 00:03:29 -0700
Dan Geer wrote re my tale of wine boxes labeled upright and inverted, and
stocked in both label orientations irrespective of packing:
>While Mr. Dunn's history...
>...is interesting, I am a numbers guy. I have forty four cardboard
> boxes in which wine was delivered to groceries, wine merchants, and
> liquor stores. In every single one without exception, the mark of the
> bottle in the cardboard proves that the side labels are upright when the
> bottles are cork-on-top. Not one single box has a "this side up" printed
> on the bottom...
Can't diagnose from here whether that's lack of experience or of observation,
but in the space of five minutes in a local liquor store yesterday I found
all of the examples I'd mentioned...even one dourly labeled "other side up
for display" and "other side up for storage" on the two ends.
>...In short, while the purported explanation may be true, it is nonetheless
> irrelevant to the facts on the ground.
So your facts are universal?
Strange, I thought we wrote here to share/compare knowledge/experience.
> I note in passing that storing cardboard boxes loaded with bottles on
> their sides does nothing but collapse the boxes, and that all wine boxes
> recovered from merchants have the tops entirely removed.
I've seldom seen tops entirely off; must be store practice/training. Sure,
without a top, they're weaker. They're also liable to collapse unless
full of bottles. So don't do it that way.
Motivation: The point of storing a corked bottle on its side is to keep
the cork moist yet let sediment settle on the side rather than on the cork.
(Easy alternative: crown-cap and store upright; sediment is on the bottom
where you want it anyway.)
For side-wise storage there's the French shipping boxes I mentioned, which
are wood and certainly won't collapse even stacked to the ceiling. They
are nice for putting a special mead by for longer periods, but they're hard
to get nowadays because they've become yuppie collector-items.
The most common shipping boxes for direct-to-consumer delivery carry the
bottles horizontally. These won't collapse because (a) they're designed
for the orientation: when the box is "upright" (corrugations vertical)
the bottles are horizontal, and (b) the inserts which separate and cushion
the bottles also support the box shape. Worth trying to find these if
you intend to store corked bottles for longer periods.
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What is it that oxidizes?
From: "John Mealey" <Mealey@grandschools.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:10:37 -0700
Dick asked, <What is it that oxidizes?>
It is the alcohol that oxidizes. The other name for the alcohol
we drink is ethanol, or ethyl alcohol. The other name for
vinegar is ethanoic acid. It is the next step after sugar and
then alcohol in this esterfication process. The next step might be
ethyl acetate if there are enough sulphur compounds in the brew.
This will take a very long time in normal beverage storage
conditions.
However, there are many fungi and bacteria that produce acetic
acid in the presence of oxygen. These may also be present in various
brews and never be noticed unless exposed to oxygen.
I suspect that these are responsible for most cases of our
brews turning to vinegar.
John Mealey
Moab, Utah
------------------------------
End of Mead Lover's Digest #1363
*******************************
