Very true. An MLF is not even needed unless there is excess malic acid to be converted.it depends on how much Malic is in the Wine, just because you go through MALO it does not ensure there is enough to produce diacetyl in levels that will be detected by our senses.
Most of that pre-fermentation dose of SO2, if it is of the proper size) ends up being bound up (no longer considered free SO2) sometime before or during fermentation. If you did pre-dose properly, you should be OK to start MLF at the start of secondary.Interesting about the diacetyl in reds. I thought the majority of reds were put through MLF and only a few whites.
You gave me an idea though. I can order the exact same frozen must, and start MLF at a Brix of 5 for the second wine. Then compare the two finished wines.
What is nice about ordering frozen must is it lessons the risk of native yeast or bacteria begining fermentation. The supplier recommends not adding SO2 at all if MLF is going to be initiated. I added about 10 ppm anyway to be safe. To be perfectly honest, this is only my 3 batch of wine but I do read and research it as much as possible (without being fired from my real job)! It is slightly addicting!
Yeah I meant press, sorry!I assume you mean press, instead of crush.
Yes, some wine makers press at different points in the process, based on factors such as the amount of tannins. If one pesses before fermentation is completed, certainly there will be a new buildup of CO2.
I would disagree with this , all red wines (except kits) should go through mlf to ensure microbial stability and eliminate the risk of spontaneous mlf occurring in the bottle ruining the wine . This is a very common fault at amateur wine comps and just as an important reason for doing mlf as acid reduction and flavour improvement.Very true. An MLF is not even needed unless there is excess malic acid to be converted.
I was not speaking specifically of reds. What I said is very true for a wine like a chardonnay. For Chardonnays, it depends on whether it is a clod climate .vs. hot climate grape. An MLF done correctly is never going to harm a wine, but it can be unnecessary. I say "done correctly is not going to harm..", because an MLF allowed to go too long or where the malic acid is very low to begin with and allowed to continue too long can harm the wine. The bacteria, if left too long, will start consuming and converting other than malic acid. The result can be considered a flaw at wine contests.I would disagree with this , all red wines (except kits) should go through mlf to ensure microbial stability and eliminate the risk of spontaneous mlf occurring in the bottle ruining the wine . This is a very common fault at amateur wine comps and just as an important reason for doing mlf as acid reduction and flavour improvement.
I am not trying to be argumentative with you on this, just trying to present the subject from my own angle. I do very much enjoy your posts and sincerely hope they will continue; we need your experience. Just keep in mind that the majority of our form members are not UC Davis students, graduates, or professional wine makers. They are newbies (and home wine makers, like me), just trying to gain a little more experience.My understanding is Mlf should always go to completion , so I'm not sure what you mean by go on too long . Do you have a reference I could read? I'd like to know more.
From what I've read Partial mlf wines are not made by arresting mlf but by blending an mlf wine with an un mlfd wine and stabilizing.
Co fermentations used to be avoided because of the risk of va production but modern strains and the latest Lallmand research , (linked above ) indicate that this risk is minimal , even non existant .
But the main reason for doing mlf on a Chardonnay isn't really an acid reduction thin , it's stylistic . White burgundy and Chablis are grown in the same climate , but one is wooded and mlfd and the other is clean and crisp . All other Chardonnays fall into one of these two styles.
Many warm climate California Chardonnays are mlfd , because some people like butter and wood .
Sometimes hybrid and American white grapes with really high acid levels are mlfd and a low diactyl producer is used and complete mlf is done and sometimes CS is also done to further drop acid but we are talking about grapes with acid levels over 11g/l and not vinifera.
MLF produces diactyl. Alcohol fermentation reduces it.In the lallmand article , not adding so2 right away produces a more fruit driven wine with less butter .
One of the substances the MLB eat after mlf appears to be diactyl , so maybe it can be a good thing , depending on what you want .
Actually both form diacetyl and both can possibly reduce it. Here is an interesting paper looking at diacetyl concentrations with EC1118 and that showed at least one strain of MLF bacteria can reduce dacetyl.MLF produces diactyl. Alcohol fermentation reduces it.
I agree with this. One way to get around that problem is to take your sample and shake it up for a while to get the Co2 out and then do your PH test.Please correct me if I am wrong but the best time to check PH is at crushing (Or in your case with frozen juice just prior to pitching yeast) and after MLF. CO2 gas from the fermentation will throw off the pH reading. Even though you have pressed there still may be CO2 gas which can throw off your readings.