Subject: Cider Digest #2075, 30 May 2017
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 12:33:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #2075 30 May 2017
Cider and Perry Discussion Forum
Contents:
Re: Conversion number for titratable acidity (Claude Jolicoeur)
Bitter aftertaste: Should I intervene or just "wait and see" ("Dana Glei")
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider#Archives
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Conversion number for titratable acidity
From: Claude Jolicoeur <cjoliprsf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 11:14:43 -0400
In CD #2073, Tom asked about TA conversions:
> Subject: Conversion number for titratable acidity
> From: Tom Brown <zeraat@sbcglobal.net>
>
> The Pacific Northwest extension publication hard cider production and
> Orchard management in the Pacific Northwest advises that to obtain titratable
> acidity of cider to multiply the number of milliliters of sodium hydroxide
> used by .536 to get the grams per liter of malic acid.
> However the New cider makers handbook provides quite a bit of good basis
> for the use of .89 as the multiplier to convert from tartaric acid to malic.
Tom,
The 0.89 factor is only for transformation of TA expressed as Tartaric
acid equivalent towards TA expressed as Malic acid equivalent.
As of the number 0.536, I don't see to what it could apply to. Possibly
it could refer to a particular acidity kit. We'd have to know the other
parameters, like the volume of the sample used and the concentration of
the NaOH solution in order to see how this works.
Claude Jolicoeur
------------------------------
Subject: Bitter aftertaste: Should I intervene or just "wait and see"
From: "Dana Glei" <dglei@sonic.net>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 18:01:54 -0700
I have a 5 gallon batch of cider that is still in secondary (now on Day 218
of fermentation). I *think* I have achieved a stuck fermentation (which is
what I wanted to do), but I am still waiting for it to clear (and trying to
be patient). But, the last time a checked the SG (about a week ago) I
tasted it and it seemed to have a bitter aftertaste. I don't think tannins
are the source of the bitterness (because the 3 apple varieties used in the
must are not ones that would have any notable level tannins). At the time,
I wasn't sure what the varieties were because they came from a friend's very
old, neglected apple trees. I thought some were Jonathan and I suspected
that one of the others might be Rome. I later consulted with a friend who
grows cider apples out here, and he thought the other two varieties were Red
Rome and Rome Beauty. Unfortunately, I did not time the picking right and
they were not completely ripe when I picked them. So, I sweated them (in a
room that was around 70F) for about 2 weeks before I pressed the juice. I
read somewhere (Lea's book? Maybe Watson?) that one should NOT sweat Rome
because it can produce a bitterness to the juice. So, I wonder if that
might be the source of the bitterness I am now tasting. I will say,
however, at the time I pressed the must, the juice tasted GREAT! (just the
way a sweet cider ought to). The bitterness seems to have shown up only in
the later stages of secondary.
My question is: Should I just "wait & see" (when I finally am able to
bottle it and then age it for 6 months or so, maybe the bitterness will get
better?). Or, should I intervene somehow? I noticed in the newsletter from
our local supply store for home wine/cider makers & brewers that they had a
discussion of procedures for fining. They listed non-fat milk as a fining
agent (to be followed by Bentonite) for white wines to remove oxidation and
reduce bitterness. I don't know if that is even appropriate for a cider.
One possibility I was thinking about is maybe I should split the batch up
into 5 gal batches and experiment with alternative treatments (No
intervention, some type of fining agent, etc.) and then compare the results.
Anyone have a recommendation of what you would do?
FYI: The SG is still too high for my taste, but I hesitate to add any
nutrient and risk having it ferment out all of the rest of the residual
sugars. So, if it is stuck (at SG=1.014) I will probably just blend it with
some of my other very dry batches (without some residual sugars, I find my
early cider making attempts to be unpalatable.I think I have a long way to
go before I produce a truly dry cider that I would want to drink).
Here are the details re: this batch
Must: Made from Jonathan, Red Rome & Rome Beauty (I think), O.G. = 1.064,
pH~3.6, treated with peptic enzyme after pressing
Sulfite: NONE
Yeast: M2 made into a starter and pitched 2 days later
1st Racking: On Day 32 @ SG=1.036 (FSU=90)
2nd Racking: On Day 42 @ SG=1.025 (FSU=105)
3rd Racking: On Day 153 @ SG=1.015 (FSU=9)
Day 210: Re-tested SG=1.014 (FSU=2)
______________________________________________
Dana A. Glei
Budding Cidermaker in Sonoma County, CA
<mailto:dglei@sonic.net> dglei@sonic.net
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #2075
*************************