My 2023 experience with Chr. Hansen CH16 bacteria

Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum

Help Support Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

crushday

grape juice artisan
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2018
Messages
1,591
Reaction score
3,455
Location
PNW - South Sound
Good morning, Winemakers!

I thought I would pass on the experience I recently had with CH16 malolactic bacteria. For you who use CH16, you know that the smallest package (1.5 g) of bacteria is enough for 66 gallons of finished wine. Of course, this quantity represents more than we need for normal home winemaking situations.

I recently crushed some Mourvèdre, Tempranillo, and Carménère, pitching the yeast (Renaissance Muse) on October 14. I typically pitch the bacteria (without MLF nutrients) at the formation of the first cap as a co-inoculation and ALWAYS have great results. When I pitched the bacteria I was surprised by the amount of bacteria in the package. Although I didn't measure, it was well over 2 tablespoons. For years, a normal quantity has been a little more than a teaspoon. I immediately thought, "I guess they sent me the 660 package by mistake". Keeping that premise, I divided the package across six full 300L stainless steel fermenters. Of course, this means I now have five packages left in my freezer. I checked the open package and all remaining packages and they have the same quantity and are all labeled for 66 gallons. Did Hansen make a mistake by filling the wrong labeled packages? From experience, I know the packaging for 66 and 660 is the same size. The only difference is the quantity printed on the package.

I emailed MoreWine on October 20: "Has the formula for Hansen CH16 changed? I recently purchased six pouches to accommodate 66 gallons each of finished wine. I was surprised to find approximately 2 tablespoons of bacteria in each package. In previous pouches, the quantity was much less, more like ~1 teaspoon.

Here is the reply I received on October 21:

"Hey George,

Thanks for reaching out. You aren't the first to reach out to us about this issue.

To give you a bit of background, the manufacturer of CH16 fills the pouches by viable cell count, not by weight or volume. In this case, it's likely that the batch they made had much less viable cells per measure of volume or weight. As such, they increased the quantity to make sure there were enough viable cells for 60 gallons of wine.

I hope this makes sense and sets you at ease. Let me know if you have any further questions or need anything else. Thanks!"


My first internal response was: "Dang, I guess I'll have to deal with a conventional MLF". At the same time, I decided to stay the course and run the test the following weekend.

Yesterday loaded the paper for the MLF test to gauge completion. This morning, I got this result:


IMG_2460.jpeg

Only the first Tempranillo is not complete (far left). The one in the middle is the Viognier (from this post) with Beta pitched.

For perspective and the timeline, I crushed the grapes on October 14 and pitched the Muse yeast. On October 15, I pitched the bacteria. On October 22, I pressed the wine. On October 28, I loaded the paper and on October 29 noted the results of the test.

My conclusions: 1) I remain a big fan of co-inoculation of bacteria. 2) I hit bacteria gold. The 66 gallon packages cost about $30, while the 660 gallon packages cost over $100. I was able to mostly complete MLF on nearly 2 tons of grapes using one package of bacteria. 3) All in, it took 15 days. 4). The wine tastes amazing...
 
Last edited:
I’m glad it turned out so well. I use VP41 mlb with good results the last two years. Did the mlb add flavor or just yield a good clean ferment? I feel the VP41 is very neutral and allows the grape to be expressed.
 
Good morning, Winemakers!

I thought I would pass on the experience I recently had with CH16 malolactic bacteria. For you who use CH16, you know that the smallest package (1.5 g) of bacteria is enough for 66 gallons of finished wine. Of course, this quantity represents more than we need for normal home winemaking situations.

I recently crushed some Mourvèdre, Tempranillo, and Carménère, pitching the yeast (Renaissance Muse) on October 14. I typically pitch the bacteria (without MLF bacteria) at the formation of the first cap as a co-inoculation and ALWAYS have great results. When I pitched the bacteria I was surprised by the amount of bacteria in the package. Although I didn't measure, it was well over 2 tablespoons. For years, a normal quantity has been a little more than a teaspoon. I immediately thought, "I guess they sent me the 660 package by mistake". Keeping that premise, I divided the package across six full 300L stainless steel fermenters. Of course, this means I now have five packages left in my freezer. I checked the open package and all remaining packages and they have the same quantity and are all labeled for 66 gallons. Did Hansen make a mistake by fillings the wrong labeled packages? From experience, I know the packaging for 66 and 660 is the same size. The only difference is the quantity printed on the package.

I emailed MoreWine on October 20: "Has the formula for Hansen CH16 changed? I recently purchased six pouches to accommodate 66 gallons each of finished wine. I was surprised to find approximately 2 tablespoons of bacteria in each package. In previous pouches, the quantity was much less, more like ~1 teaspoon.

Here is the reply I received on October 21:

"Hey George,

Thanks for reaching out. You aren't the first to reach out to us about this issue.

To give you a bit of background, the manufacturer of CH16 fills the pouches by viable cell count, not by weight or volume. In this case, it's likely that the batch they made had much less viable cells per measure of volume or weight. As such, they increased the quantity to make sure there were enough viable cells for 60 gallons of wine.

I hope this makes sense and sets you at ease. Let me know if you have any further questions or need anything else. Thanks!"


My first internal response was: "Dang, I guess I'll have to deal with a conventional MLF". At the same time, I decided to stay the course and run the test the following weekend.

Yesterday loaded the paper for the MLF test to gauge completion. This morning, I got this result:


View attachment 106952

Only the first Tempranillo is not complete (far left). The one in the middle is the Viognier (from this post) with Beta pitched.

For perspective and the timeline, I crushed the grapes on October 14 and pitched the Muse yeast. On October 15, I pitched the bacteria. On October 22, I pressed the wine. On October 28, I loaded the paper and on October 29 noted the results of the test.

My conclusions: 1) I remain a big fan of co-inoculation of bacteria. 2) I hit bacteria gold. The 66 gallon packages cost about $30, while the 660 gallon packages cost over $100. I was able to mostly complete MLF on 2 tons of grapes using one package of bacteria. 3) All in, it took 15 days. 4). The wine tastes amazing...
That’s quite amazing George! I guess a little can go a long way - if Morewine is being true about this. How is one to know? I look forward to taste some of your amazing wine from this vintage. Cheers!
 
I had the same experience - CH16, wanted to divide it between 4 vessels so weighed it out and it was 12.9g as opposed to the stated 1.5g. I assumed it was excipients that were added to help the freeze dry process, but your comment about viable cells also makes sense.

I was concerned about the viability because, despite my ordering the package to be shipped with ice packs, it arrived warm after shipping over the weekend. The contents were 'chunky' as opposed to bein a powder, I can't recall if this is normal or if it's a sign that something is amiss?

Regardless, I don't think my ML is working. I added after my primary fermentation, and just as we were going into a cold spell of weather. Normally by now, there is a distinct crackling in the barrel/keg/carboy. Apart from the occasional tiny pop in my barrel, I have no evidence of activity, and nothing at all in my keg and carboy...
 
Nice. You have plenty for next year. It makes sense though. The bacteria multiply fast so it doesn’t take much. We add what we add to make sure the culture we want rapidly overtakes any natural bacteria already present.

I recently had to use a different MLB and I hope I get the same prompt results that you did. CH 16 was sold out at Lodi Wine Labs a testament to its popularity.
 
I had the same experience - CH16, wanted to divide it between 4 vessels so weighed it out and it was 12.9g as opposed to the stated 1.5g. I assumed it was excipients that were added to help the freeze dry process, but your comment about viable cells also makes sense.

I was concerned about the viability because, despite my ordering the package to be shipped with ice packs, it arrived warm after shipping over the weekend. The contents were 'chunky' as opposed to bein a powder, I can't recall if this is normal or if it's a sign that something is amiss?

Regardless, I don't think my ML is working. I added after my primary fermentation, and just as we were going into a cold spell of weather. Normally by now, there is a distinct crackling in the barrel/keg/carboy. Apart from the occasional tiny pop in my barrel, I have no evidence of activity, and nothing at all in my keg and carboy...Barr
BarrelMonkey, When did you pitch the bacteria? My experience is that it takes much longer to complete post ferment.

Funny circumstance on this particular bacteria. When I first ordered it and it arrived, I gave Mrs. Crushday instructions to open the shipping box and the icepack and put the packages in the freezer right away. She called me after the package arrived (I was at work) and she said the icepack was empty. Sure enough, they shipped me an ice pack with no bacteria. I called MoreWine and they shipped the bacteria (and another icepack) a couple days later.

Hope your wine turns out great!
 
BarrelMonkey, When did you pitch the bacteria? My experience is that it takes much longer to complete post ferment.

Funny circumstance on this particular bacteria. When I first ordered it and it arrived, I gave Mrs. Crushday instructions to open the shipping box and the icepack and put the packages in the freezer right away. She called me after the package arrived (I was at work) and she said the icepack was empty. Sure enough, they shipped me an ice pack with no bacteria. I called MoreWine and they shipped the bacteria (and another icepack) a couple days later.

Hope your wine turns out great!
I pitched the bugs a few days after primary fermentation ended. So drain/press from primary, leave to settle for 2 days, rack off gross lees into barrel/keg/carboy and then add CH16 a day later.

For sure, I'm not expecting it to be done yet, but I would expect to see some signs of activity by now. I would love to get ML over by the end of November - December at the latest, so that I can add SO2 and move on to aging.
 
I assumed it was excipients that were added to help the freeze dry process, but your comment about viable cells also makes sense.

I learned a new word today! Thank you, BM!

ex·cip·i·ent
/ikˈsipēənt/
noun
plural noun: excipients
an inactive substance that serves as the vehicle or medium for a drug or other active substance.
"excipients are things like coloring agents, preservatives, and fillers"
 
I’m glad it turned out so well. I use VP41 mlb with good results the last two years. Did the mlb add flavor or just yield a good clean ferment? I feel the VP41 is very neutral and allows the grape to be expressed.
You asked, “Did the mlb add flavor or just yield a good clean ferment?” Great question.

Last year, I had some ‘22 Carménère and did a little experiment whereas I added CH16 to 1/2 the batch and Oenos to the other 1/2. To this day, they remain very different wines as verified by @NorCal, @4score, @Busabill and @CDrew.

I’m pretty convinced that the bacteria we use has an affect on the overall flavor profile and provides differences in aroma and mouthfeel.

However, as @4score has always maintained, there must be other unknown or unrecognized differences.
 
Last edited:
As a side note, according to the technical data sheet for CH16 it takes 1-2 weeks to finish under ideal conditions of pH above 3.2 and temp between 64 and 71. Mine was shipped without ice pack, appeared clumpy. I have no way to test for completion but it fizzed up a lot when I added it, almost into a volcano. Saw lots of small bubbles in the following days so I'm assuming it's working.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top