wild yeast article

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.
To me it is not so much an issue of letting the fermentation go with wild yeast versus commercial yeast, but of Acetobacter and Lactobacillus. Bacteria are more the risk at issue, not the "wild" yeasts doing any fermentation. SO2 helps remove the bacterial issue (playing it safe). But, to some, its "undesirable" effect is it also suppresses many wild yeast. Thus, by letting the fermentation go wild, one simply is taking more risks. Risks can gain greater rewards than playing it safe, or end up in total disaster. One simply chooses the risks they wish to take or not. It is that simple to me. So I fail to see the point of debating or debassing one method over the other. To me it simply personal choice. But, some people love to make a quasi-religion out of the most trivial topics, and become zealots in the process. Meanwhile, to me, the art of wine making should include all schools of thought and technique. To each their own.
 
Even though native fermentation has been done successfully for eons I'm just too afraid to try it.
Ditto. As @balatonwine said, it's a matter of risk. My tolerance for this risk is low.

Among the guys that taught me, a few did only wild fermentation -- crush the grapes and stand back. Some years the wine was really good, some years it was really not, and most were "meh". Not bad, but nothing I'd run 30 feet for a glass. But it was the way their father or grandfather did it, so it was good enough for them.

I like the background the article provides, as it touches on a lot of things I had not thought about. If anything, the article pushed me away from trying a wild ferment, as the risk-to-benefit ratio is way too low for my tolerance and $1 USD for a package of yeast is cheap insurance that I'll get a good ferment.
 
Back
Top