all the cooking technique books i read tell about taking wine or
balsamic vinegar and slowing heating (sometimes boiling) the solution so
water is removed and flavor increased by concentrating the flavors.

main problem is how to remove water from wine/vinegar solutions without
destroying flavor.

i do not have any idea how the commercial companies make reductions


heating these solutions would drive off very subtle flavors and really
is not the ideal way to do it.


since i do not have a freeze dry machine or a vacuum still ( this would
allow you to use very little heat and water would be driven off by
actually boiling the liquid at a very low temperature.






freezing the solution and frequently removing the water ( ice) might be ok.

one solution which i am now going to play with is to use sausage casing
to act as a membrane that allows water vapor to go thru but not the good
stuff

( a gore tex tube would really work nice--i think)

anyway
using large collagen casing i have place balsamic vinegar and wine into
separate casing and placed them outside---i like the idea of using fresh
air to remove water.


so far it seems that some of the wine/vinegar is diffusing out of the
casings but will continue to see what happens.


i have ordered dialysis tubing which might be a great way to do this.


keep tuned


peter

ilaboo wrote:

>
>
> all the cooking technique books i read tell about taking wine or
> balsamic vinegar and slowing heating (sometimes boiling) the solution
> so water is removed and flavor increased by concentrating the flavors.
>
> main problem is how to remove water from wine/vinegar solutions
> without destroying flavor.
>
> i do not have any idea how the commercial companies make reductions
>
>
> heating these solutions would drive off very subtle flavors and really
> is not the ideal way to do it.
>
>
> since i do not have a freeze dry machine or a vacuum still ( this
> would allow you to use very little heat and water would be driven off
> by actually boiling the liquid at a very low temperature.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> freezing the solution and frequently removing the water ( ice) might
> be ok.
>
> one solution which i am now going to play with is to use sausage
> casing to act as a membrane that allows water vapor to go thru but not
> the good stuff
>
> ( a gore tex tube would really work nice--i think)
>
> anyway
> using large collagen casing i have place balsamic vinegar and wine
> into separate casing and placed them outside---i like the idea of
> using fresh air to remove water.
>
>
> so far it seems that some of the wine/vinegar is diffusing out of the
> casings but will continue to see what happens.
>
>
> i have ordered dialysis tubing which might be a great way to do this.
>
>
> keep tuned
>
>
> peter

Some interesting concepts but I retired from the dialysis industry last
year and never heard of dialysis "tubing". If you're talking about the
semi permeable membrane within the dialyzer, be advised that most of the
materials used today are for Hi-Flux dialysis and the pores are
huge....almost big enough to spill protein. The older dialyzers were
made from cellulose acetate and the pores were much smaller....so....if
you can find it, cellophane might work. (And be cheaper.)

Bubba

--
You wanna measure, or you wanna cook?

Bubba wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Some interesting concepts but I retired from the dialysis industry last
> year and never heard of dialysis "tubing".
>

tried to find cellophane tubing to no avail--maybe should look for bags

dialysis tuping is used to coincentrate protein solutions--comes in
various molecular weight passing or pore sizes

got some coming from ebay but needs to soaked in chelating chemical to
remover traces of haavy metals

dialysis tubing is a catch all for tubing used like this


i think it's going to be a neat way to create reductions--i always
wanted a kitchen with salami etc hanging from the ceiling--the casing
hanging on my closesline is freaking some people out!!

hth
peter

ilaboo wrote:


looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn

will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

ilaboo wrote:


looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn

will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

ilaboo wrote:


looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn

will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

ilaboo wrote:

> ilaboo wrote:
>
> looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn
>
> will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many
components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How
are you making that determination?

What was beginning pH? Present pH?

Pastorio

ilaboo wrote:

> ilaboo wrote:
>
> looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn
>
> will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many
components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How
are you making that determination?

What was beginning pH? Present pH?

Pastorio

ilaboo wrote:

> ilaboo wrote:
>
> looks like it's concentrated to about 1/3 of original volumn
>
> will give it more time--aiming to about 1/8 of original

Are you distinguishing between mere reduction with loss of many
components and actual concentration with only the loss of water? How
are you making that determination?

What was beginning pH? Present pH?

Pastorio

making only a concentration

should have checked ph of the wine --have ph paper


as i see it a reduction is reducting the volumne of the liqid by driving
of water usually by gentle heat


it's the heat i am trying to avoid

heat not only drives out water but a bunch of volitile components and
probably carmelizes ( have to look up chemistry of that) or hydolizes
various sugars --which may or not be agood thing


seems so far working out rather well ( did not taste any of it yet!!)
stay tuned

peter

ilaboo wrote:

> making only a concentration
>
> should have checked ph of the wine --have ph paper
>
> as i see it a reduction is reducting the volumne of the liqid by driving
> of water usually by gentle heat

Right. ANd lots of other stuff, too. That's why you can smell it. If
it were just water; no smell.

> it's the heat i am trying to avoid
>
> heat not only drives out water but a bunch of volitile components and
> probably carmelizes ( have to look up chemistry of that) or hydolizes
> various sugars --which may or not be agood thing

So without any basis for the decision, you've decided to avoid heat.
Good thinking. Sorta.

> seems so far working out rather well ( did not taste any of it yet!!)
> stay tuned

Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for
your decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive
out the excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why
don't you just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains
liquid. Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved.

Pastorio

Bob Pastorio egged Peter on:

> Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your
> decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the
> excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you
> just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid.
> Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved.

Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the
water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that
Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do
just that.

Bob

Bob wrote:

> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on:
>
>>Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your
>>decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the
>>excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you
>>just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid.
>>Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved.
>
> Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the
> water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that
> Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do
> just that.

I bet he'd appreciate some URL's that would offer him such equipment.
Have your people get right on that, ok?

There is already available a full range of commercial products from
vinegar concentrates (very syrupy) to spray-dried vinegar powder. This
latest exercise from Peter is reinventing the wheel to drive to the
beginning of reinventing yet another wheel.

I mean home science projects are all well and good. I do my share of
them and I suspect you do as well. But I do ask a few questions first
and adjust my thinking based on facts obtained.

Oh, well..Tis the season to be jolly and all.

Pastorio

Bob wrote:
> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on:
>
>
>>Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for your
>>decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out the
>>excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you
>>just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid.
>>Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved.
>
>
> Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the
> water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure that
> Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him to do
> just that.
>
> Bob
>
>
i agree ideal weay would be to freeze dry it--once did it took a gallon
of wine and got it down to about 2 ml--used it to seperate out the
sugars using column chromatography

lab looked like a rainbow of tubes
beautiful!!!

Bob (this one) wrote:
> Bob wrote:
>
>> Bob Pastorio egged Peter on:
>>
>>> Peter, you have an uncanny knack for picking irrelevant criteria for
>>> your
>>> decisions. The whole point of this reduction, you say it to drive out
>>> the
>>> excess water while retaining the other desirable elements. Why don't you
>>> just freeze it. Water will freeze first. Other stuff remains liquid.
>>> Maybe. Another science project. No heat involved.
>>
>>
>> Oh, c'mon, Bob! You know perfectly well that a better way to remove the
>> water would be to freeze the liquid in a vacuum chamber. And I'm sure
>> that
>> Peter would be willing to acquire an apparatus which would allow him
>> to do just that.
>
>
> I bet he'd appreciate some URL's that would offer him such equipment.
> Have your people get right on that, ok?
>
> There is already available a full range of commercial products from
> vinegar concentrates (very syrupy) to spray-dried vinegar powder. This
> latest exercise from Peter is reinventing the wheel to drive to the
> beginning of reinventing yet another wheel.
>
> I mean home science projects are all well and good. I do my share of
> them and I suspect you do as well. But I do ask a few questions first
> and adjust my thinking based on facts obtained.
>
> Oh, well..Tis the season to be jolly and all.
>
> Pastorio
>
i am not trying to invent the wheeel--i am fully cognisant of vacumne
distallation ( searched on ebay for a set up)--to much money

freeze drying same problem

but dialysis tubing yep got it but has to be boiuled in chelating
solution to remove havy metals--not a good way

collegen saussage casing AHHHA this might be the way!!
stay tuned

ilaboo wrote:


reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light syrupy
with rather intense but somewhat light taste
absolutly delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of
surrounding air.


wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled off

will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml




in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few hours
to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented the wine
from turning into vinegar


stay tuned

waiting for the dialysis tubing

ilaboo wrote:


reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light syrupy
with rather intense but somewhat light taste
absolutly delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of
surrounding air.


wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled off

will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml




in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few hours
to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented the wine
from turning into vinegar


stay tuned

waiting for the dialysis tubing

ilaboo wrote:

> reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light
> syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly
> delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of
> surrounding air.
>
> wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled
> off
>
> will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml
>
> in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few
> hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented
> the wine from turning into vinegar

<LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive
off the alcohol. There's plenty of good information out there about
that whole question. You may go find it if you're interested.

It wouldn't have prevented the change. Keeping acetobacters out of the
wine would have, Look that up, too.

Pastorio

ilaboo wrote:

> reducted 1000 ml of balsalmic vinegar to less that 100 ml---light
> syrupy with rather intense but somewhat light taste absolutly
> delicious!--no heat whatsoever other than temperature of
> surrounding air.
>
> wine ( arlo rossi paisano)is about 250 ml and seems to be leveled
> off
>
> will give it more time and see if it will go to 100 ml
>
> in retrospect i probably should have left the wine open for a few
> hours to drive off the alcohol --this probably would have prevented
> the wine from turning into vinegar

<LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive
off the alcohol. There's plenty of good information out there about
that whole question. You may go find it if you're interested.

It wouldn't have prevented the change. Keeping acetobacters out of the
wine would have, Look that up, too.

Pastorio

>
> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off
> the alcohol.

lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a
"few hours"

i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to
come up with something simple

i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very
sensitive balance


i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than
water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water


i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few
hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity


cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol
(ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of
holes--but lets see what happens

anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001
milligrams?

peter

>
> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive off
> the alcohol.

lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a
"few hours"

i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to
come up with something simple

i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very
sensitive balance


i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than
water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water


i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few
hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity


cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol
(ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of
holes--but lets see what happens

anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001
milligrams?

peter

ilaboo wrote:

>> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
>> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive
>> off the alcohol.
>
> lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a
> "few hours"
>
> i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to
> come up with something simple

Hygrometer. Look it up. Hydrometer. Look that one up, too.

> i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very
> sensitive balance
>
> i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than
> water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water

Alcohol *alone* is more volatile. In solution, it will change. Physics
101.

There's a technical name for the type of mixture alcohol and water
make. When you know that and its definition, you'll begin to see the
flaw in your assumption.

Azeotrope. Look it up.

Alcohol remaining preparation
100% Immediate consumption
70% Overnight storage
85% Boiling liquid, remove from heat
75% flamed baked or simmered:
40% 15 min.
35% 30min.
25% 1 hour
20% 1.5 hour
10% 2 hours
5% 2.5 hours
(from Agricultural Research Service 1989)

> i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few
> hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity

So the "experiment" has open and ill-defined parameters and guesses
about the physical properties being examined. Just like the other one
you heralded with great fanfare.

Pastorio

> cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol
> (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of
> holes--but lets see what happens
>
> anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001
> milligrams?
>
> peter

ilaboo wrote:

>> <LOL> Could you be more relentlessly and consistently dense? Leaving
>> it "open for a few hours" would have done virtually nothing to drive
>> off the alcohol.
>
> lets try and see what happens to the alcohol content of wine after a
> "few hours"
>
> i dont have access to chemically quantifying alcohol so we will have to
> come up with something simple

Hygrometer. Look it up. Hydrometer. Look that one up, too.

> i understand that using a straw and a razor blade one could make a very
> sensitive balance
>
> i will make the assumption that since alcohol is much more volitile than
> water then the initial weight loss will be due to alchohol and not water

Alcohol *alone* is more volatile. In solution, it will change. Physics
101.

There's a technical name for the type of mixture alcohol and water
make. When you know that and its definition, you'll begin to see the
flaw in your assumption.

Azeotrope. Look it up.

Alcohol remaining preparation
100% Immediate consumption
70% Overnight storage
85% Boiling liquid, remove from heat
75% flamed baked or simmered:
40% 15 min.
35% 30min.
25% 1 hour
20% 1.5 hour
10% 2 hours
5% 2.5 hours
(from Agricultural Research Service 1989)

> i will balance a glass of wine and see how much weight is lost in a "few
> hours"--remember i cannot control for temperature and relative humidity

So the "experiment" has open and ill-defined parameters and guesses
about the physical properties being examined. Just like the other one
you heralded with great fanfare.

Pastorio

> cthulgling has not reveiled anything about the volitility of alcohol
> (ethyl) and water mixtures so teh whole experiment if full of lots of
> holes--but lets see what happens
>
> anyone out there have access to a scale that can weigh to at least 0.001
> milligrams?
>
> peter

follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating

alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar

about 1 cup

very thick syruppy natudre
i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and
syruppy

stay tuned to another follow up


will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to
drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in
fridge

peter

ilaboo wrote:
> follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating
>
> alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar

If it's vinegar, it wasn't mold that grew in it. It was acetobacters.

Pastorio


>
> about 1 cup
>
> very thick syruppy natudre
> i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and
> syruppy
>
> stay tuned to another follow up
>
>
> will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to
> drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in
> fridge

ilaboo wrote:
> follow up as to what happened to teh wine i was concentrating
>
> alas turned to absolutely delicius vinegar

If it's vinegar, it wasn't mold that grew in it. It was acetobacters.

Pastorio


>
> about 1 cup
>
> very thick syruppy natudre
> i suspect a mold grew in it but not sure as the entire cup was thick and
> syruppy
>
> stay tuned to another follow up
>
>
> will remove alcohol from teh wine by exopsing it to very little heat to
> drive most of it off or even place it in a vaccumm than place casing in
> fridge