Newbee questions about heating and aeration

[wayneb]

But if you're like me and hate to convert between SG and Brix even more than working with decimals, then you are correct, Earendil. For the purpose of determining the 1/3 sugar break, take your starting SG, then subtract from that the SG that you expect to end up with when all fermentable sugars are gone (actually, although most totally dry meads end up at slightly less than the SG of plain water, using 1.000 - the SG of water - is close enough for most purposes). That gives you the total change in SG that will occur during fermentation. Take 1/3 of that result, and subtract that from your original SG. The result will be the SG at your 1/3 sugar break.

Here's an example: For a starting SG of 1.126, assuming the mead would be at 1.000 after all the sugars are gone, the total change in SG is 0.126. Take 1/3 of that, which turns out to be 0.042. Subtract that from the original SG: 1.126 - 0.042 = 1.084. 1.084 is the SG at your 1/3 sugar break!

... and your question is not at all silly! :cheers:

 

[Earendil]

Ah; I understand. I haven't used Brix, yet; I saw the Specific Gravity and % Potential Alcohol and just started using them. Is there a benefit to using Brix?

I am so glad to have gotten all of this great info! I'm mixing my next must right now; I love that moment when one can put new knowledge to work and this is that moment. Again, my thanks to you all.

I have two meads in fermentation now; one of Brazilian Tropical Flower and one of Pumpkin Blossom. I also have enough of the Pumpkin Blossom honey to make another batch, so I'm going to do that and compare the fermentation, flavor, etc. between the one-shake batch and this one.

I have a related question. I've been fermenting in a 60˚ to 65˚ environment. I've seen various recommendations from 60˚ (Schramm) to 75˚ (Papazian). Which (if any) is better? During the reproductive phase, is it beneficial to have a warmer or cooler environment?

 

[Medsen Fey]

Hello Earendil,

Ideal fermentation temperature will vary depending on the individual yeast's tolerance and the specific recipe, but as a general rule, the lower end of the yeasts temperature range is usually the better place to be. I think cooler fermentations preserve more aromatic elements.

Oskaar posted the Pros and Cons of temperature in another thread.

If you use the Search Tool (highly recommended), you can find several other discussions of temperature along with answers to many other questions as they develop.

Good meading!
Medsen

 

[Earendil]

Thanks; will do!

Earendil

 

[Oskaar]

But if you're like me and hate to convert between SG and Brix even more than working with decimals, then you are correct, Earendil. For the purpose of determining the 1/3 sugar break, take your starting SG, then subtract from that the SG that you expect to end up with when all fermentable sugars are gone (actually, although most totally dry meads end up at slightly less than the SG of plain water, using 1.000 - the SG of water - is close enough for most purposes). That gives you the total change in SG that will occur during fermentation. Take 1/3 of that result, and subtract that from your original SG. The result will be the SG at your 1/3 sugar break.

Here's an example: For a starting SG of 1.126, assuming the mead would be at 1.000 after all the sugars are gone, the total change in SG is 0.126. Take 1/3 of that, which turns out to be 0.042. Subtract that from the original SG: 1.126 - 0.042 = 1.084. 1.084 is the SG at your 1/3 sugar break!

... and your question is not at all silly! :cheers:

LOL, no conversion necessary if you use brix hydrometers, I only speak specific gravity here on the forums, everything I do is by brix in the Meadworx.

Cheers,

Oskaar

 

[wayneb]

LOL, no conversion necessary if you use brix hydrometers, I only speak specific gravity here on the forums, everything I do is by brix in the Meadworx.

Cheers,

Oskaar

Yeah, well call me "old fashioned!" :laughing7: I still use my old hydrometers (older than many of you here on the forum), and they don't know from Brix! :laughing4:

 

[Oskaar]

Yeah, well call me "old fashioned!" :laughing7: I still use my old hydrometers (older than many of you here on the forum), and they don't know from Brix! :laughing4:

Hahaaaa!

Betchya my brix hydrometers are older than you!

Cheers,

Oskaar

 

[Teufelhund]

HEY! An OZZY! :laughing7: Welcome to GotMead?!

How many times you been married?? :laughing4:

:cheers:

DD

But I decided to "just do it". I don't like thinking too much before trying something new

 

[wayneb]

Yeah, well call me "old fashioned!" :laughing7: I still use my old hydrometers (older than many of you here on the forum), and they don't know from Brix! :laughing4:

Hahaaaa!

Betchya my brix hydrometers are older than you!

Cheers,

Oskaar

Yeah, but that's because they're European.

 

[Oskaar]

Yeah, but that's because they're European.

LOL, tomAto tomAAHto.

Cheers,

Oskaar

 

[Earendil]

I have another question about aeration. It occurred to me that shaking has to be relatively inefficient; for one thing, the air in there is already mostly CO2, so not much real oxygenation is taking place. For another, I can't really agitate an 80# carboy as thoroughly as one might want. And I don't want to blow new air into the headspace for obvious reasons.

A fellow at my local brew supply store suggested I use a tank of oxygen, a wand and a diffusion stone. He said that I could take a must to its maximum ability to hold oxygen in this way in about 20-30 seconds each time. He has a tank (about 15" high) that he filled over a year ago. He has made over 20 batches of beer with it and it is still far from empty. He didn't know about mead, though he suspected that the requirements would be about the same.

I had read a posting on this site by someone (might have been Oskaar) who used an aquarium pump to pump air through the must to aerate it. The fellow at the brew-store said that this would be largely self-defeating, as the nitrogen in the air would scrub much of the oxygen out of the must as it travels through it.

I've browsed about 400 postings and read nearly 100 posts, on this site, that relate to aeration/oxygenation, but few that address the use of pure oxygen and fewer by those who use the technique. This method seems, in theory, like far and away the best way to aerate, but I'd like to get the opinions of other meadmakers who have used this method. Do you feel it is superior to other techniques? Any noticeable difference in quality of product? Convenience? Expense? How long does a tank of oxygen last?

Thanks!

 

[nbagshaw]

One thing I've learned about meadmaking is to have fun and enjoy the process as much as the end result.

Reading the posts I've come to the relization I'm not alone.....girls & pool parties, dynamiting trout...

In that vein, I think I'll aerate my next mead with a trip to Busch Gardens and a ride on the fastest roller coaster.
That's not the travelocity gnome, that's CarboyMan!

 

[wayneb]

Earendil, I'll defer to Oskaar on this one. I've not used a pure O2 injection in any of my meads. Not because I'm inherently against it (although I think that I'd like to see someone do quantitative studies on homebrew-sized batches before I'll be convinced that it is significantly more efficient than my air through an airstone technique), but mostly because I don't have the funds to invest in the hardware to try it myself.

 

[Oskaar]

I have another question about aeration. It occurred to me that shaking has to be relatively inefficient; for one thing, the air in there is already mostly CO2, so not much real oxygenation is taking place. For another, I can't really agitate an 80# carboy as thoroughly as one might want. And I don't want to blow new air into the headspace for obvious reasons.

A fellow at my local brew supply store suggested I use a tank of oxygen, a wand and a diffusion stone. He said that I could take a must to its maximum ability to hold oxygen in this way in about 20-30 seconds each time. He has a tank (about 15" high) that he filled over a year ago. He has made over 20 batches of beer with it and it is still far from empty. He didn't know about mead, though he suspected that the requirements would be about the same.

I had read a posting on this site by someone (might have been Oskaar) who used an aquarium pump to pump air through the must to aerate it. The fellow at the brew-store said that this would be largely self-defeating, as the nitrogen in the air would scrub much of the oxygen out of the must as it travels through it.

I've browsed about 400 postings and read nearly 100 posts, on this site, that relate to aeration/oxygenation, but few that address the use of pure oxygen and fewer by those who use the technique. This method seems, in theory, like far and away the best way to aerate, but I'd like to get the opinions of other meadmakers who have used this method. Do you feel it is superior to other techniques? Any noticeable difference in quality of product? Convenience? Expense? How long does a tank of oxygen last?

Thanks!

You'll find that LHBS folks who aren't mead makers by preference are for the most part reguritating information they heard from someone else without testing it for themselves.

Bottom line is that you can read and read and read until you pass out. The best way to determine what works best for your purposes is to try each method for yourself. I've used aquarium pumps with great effect and produced excellent meads using that method. I've also used pure O2 through a diffusion stone as well which worked out really nicely too. Honestly, neither of them is any better than using a lees stirrer to WTC out of your must during the first 1/3 of fermentation in my experience. If someone is telling you that one way is the best way I'd be surprised if they weren't telling you what their personal preference is as opposed to what the facts are.

Hope that helps,

Oskaar

PS, My opinion is that a lees stirrer will kick ass on a pure oxygen infusion. My ferments run as short as 5 days to as long as 14 days. Ask your LHBS guy how long his run.

Cheers,

Oskaar

 

[wayneb]

PS, My opinion is that a lees stirrer will kick ass on a pure oxygen infusion. My ferments run as short as 5 days to as long as 14 days. Ask your LHBS guy how long his run.

Cheers,

Oskaar

Yeah! My contention is that the must can only hold O2 to a certain equilibrium when in solution in the must; any more will just percolate out to the atmosphere very quickly. So once you've incorporated as much as you can get in via mechanical methods (lees stirrer or aquarium pump), any more won't stay in the must long enough to be of any use. So "pure" O2 sounds like it should be better than room air (after all, high tech is sexy!!), but unless you know that what goes into the must stays in the must, it can't be expected to be demonstrably better than the low-tech methods.

 

[Earendil]

It's a good thing I love the learning of new things; now I have to find out what a lees stirrer is, what 'WTC' stands for (though I can make a rough guess), etc.

wayneb, I can see the validity of the idea that the must can only hold so much gas, but it seems to me (again, all in theory) that 1) if you're going to infuse gas into a liquid and 2) if the liquid can only hold so much gas and 3) if what you want is oxygen in there, it would make sense (theoretically) to infuse it with pure oxygen; otherwise about 80% of the gas that is in the must is actually nitrogen, CO2 and trace gases.

I'm curious about the lees stirrer. It sounds like it agitates the lees at the bottom of the carboy and that mental picture doesn't suggest the introduction of fresh air/oxygen into the must. I want to ask a bunch of questions, but I'll school myself to patience and do some research.

First, I'm going to find out what a lees stirrer is and how it works. But being an equipment wonk, I may try the pure-O2 thing, side-by-side with an identical must using the 'KC and the Sunshine Band' technique (shake, shake, shake ...) and see how they compare.

I have to say, after meadmaking all by myself, all this time, it's a real pleasure to find and hobnob with all of you. I've learned a lot in the last 3 days ...

Thanks!

 

[WorkSpace]

.... being an equipment wonk, I may try the pure-O2 thing, side-by-side with an identical must using the 'KC and the Sunshine Band' technique (shake, shake, shake ...) and see how they compare. ...

Are you going to try the olive oil trick? By all accounts, it replaces aeration, and there is no risk of contamination. Maybe you could make it part of your controlled test :icon_scratch: .

 

[wayneb]

wayneb, I can see the validity of the idea that the must can only hold so much gas, but it seems to me (again, all in theory) that 1) if you're going to infuse gas into a liquid and 2) if the liquid can only hold so much gas and 3) if what you want is oxygen in there, it would make sense (theoretically) to infuse it with pure oxygen; otherwise about 80% of the gas that is in the must is actually nitrogen, CO2 and trace gases.

I can see why you might think that, but in actuality unless there is a pure O2 gas blanket immediately above the must, all the dissolved gas constituents in the must will naturally disperse to an equilibrium that is similar in relative composition to the partial pressures of the constituent gases in the atmosphere, pretty quickly. There is no evidence that extra O2 stays in the must for very long. How quickly do we getr back to a "room air" equilibrium? Well, I don't know the answer to that without being able to conduct an experiment, but the anecdotal evidence from those of us who only introduce atmospheric air to the must (via either the WTC or forced airstone techniques), strongly suggest that it is quick enough that there is no significant benefit derived from using the pure O2. I haven't heard of anyone using O2 infusion getting faster fermentations than Oskaar or I do, nor do they report better ETOH tolerance, nor any other significant differences in any of the other measures of fermentation kinetics.

And yes, WTC stands for what you might think it does -- "Whip the C&@% out of it!"

Also, using a lees stirrer nearer the surface of the must will force a lot of liquid exposure to the gas above it, since it gets the must spinning around at a pretty good clip. When I do WTC, I use a large (12") stainless steel wire whisk, only because I like the forearm workout that I get as a side benefit! The lees stirrer technique is the most efficient mechanical means of forcing exposure to the room air that I've seen. It is even better than the aquarium pump. I only use the pump/airstone method before I've pitched yeast, because I can set it and walk away from it for 30 mins or so as I prep and then rehydrate yeast to ready it for pitching. After fermentation starts I'll either use my whisk or a lees stirrer, depending on my mood. :cheers:

So, yeah, my argument is anecdotal. But I like a good anecdote from time to time! :laughing7:

 

[Earendil]

Hmm ... so in theory, if one wanted to make the most of 'oxygen therapy', you'd want to fill the headspace with oxygen as well.

I'm using WTC, right now, and I'm not unhappy doing so; I'm glad to understand some of the techniques, perspectives and trade-offs.

Thanks to All,


Eärendil

 

[Earendil]

.... being an equipment wonk, I may try the pure-O2 thing, side-by-side with an identical must using the 'KC and the Sunshine Band' technique (shake, shake, shake ...) and see how they compare. ...

Are you going to try the olive oil trick? By all accounts, it replaces aeration, and there is no risk of contamination. Maybe you could make it part of your controlled test :icon_scratch: .

Wow; sorry I didn't catch this; I never heard of this technique. How in the world can you get oxygen into your must through a film of olive oil? (or at least that's the picture that 'olive oil trick brings to my mind!)

Now I have another thing to research!


Eärendil