Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Wine (alt.food.wine) Devoted to the discussion of wine and wine-related topics. A place to read and comment about wines, wine and food matching, storage systems, wine paraphernalia, etc. In general, any topic related to wine is valid fodder for the group. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello,
I was always under the impression that grapes, left to themselves, will rot and turn into wine. However, a friend of mine recently told me that wine must undergo a very specific fermentation process to make it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. The truth from the experts, please. Pointers to any pertinent info or FAQs will be genuinely appreciated. Thanks! |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark > wrote in news:none-7773B9.13550128092004
@news.giganews.com: > Hello, > > I was always under the impression that grapes, left to themselves, > will rot and turn into wine. However, a friend of mine recently told > me that wine must undergo a very specific fermentation process to make > it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. > > The truth from the experts, please. Pointers to any pertinent info or > FAQs will be genuinely appreciated. > > Thanks! > naturally occuring yeasts will turn grape juice into "wine" naturally but it takes skilland finesse to make the alcoholic juice into something that we would call WINE! |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >, jcoulter > wrote:
> Mark > wrote in news:none-7773B9.13550128092004 > @news.giganews.com: > > > Hello, > > > > I was always under the impression that grapes, left to themselves, > > will rot and turn into wine. However, a friend of mine recently told > > me that wine must undergo a very specific fermentation process to make > > it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. > > > > The truth from the experts, please. Pointers to any pertinent info or > > FAQs will be genuinely appreciated. > > > > Thanks! > > > > naturally occuring yeasts will turn grape juice into "wine" naturally but > it takes skilland finesse to make the alcoholic juice into something that > we would call WINE! Thank you for the reply. So I was correct. If one leaves grapes to themselves, they will indeed become alcoholic wine. Would this wine at least be edible? Thanks again! |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark > wrote in
: > > So I was correct. If one leaves grapes to themselves, they will > indeed become alcoholic wine. Would this wine at least be > edible? > > Thanks again! > having done this once or twice in extreme amature conditions I can only say most likely not. It takes clean and careful attention to the process to make a wine that can be drunk albeit one that is still a bit rough. To produce really drinkable wine takes a deft hand. We have a few of those who read this group perhaps they could chime in about now? |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mark" wrote in message
> > I was always under the impression that grapes, left to > > themselves, will rot and turn into wine. > > However, a friend of mine recently told me that wine > > must undergo a very specific fermentation process to make > > it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. > > >> naturally occuring yeasts will turn grape juice into "wine" naturally but >> it takes skill and finesse to make the alcoholic juice into something >> that >> we would call WINE! > > So I was correct. If one leaves grapes to themselves, they will > indeed become alcoholic wine. Would this wine at least be > edible? No, I am sorry, your assumption is not correct. Please read what was written - yeasts will convert the sugars [in grape juice] into alcohol - however, that is a long way from "left to themselves, grapes will rot and turn into wine". Left to themselves (on the vine) grapes with either wither and/or rot - and will certainly not miraculously convert to Ch. Latour. Fermentation is an anaerobic process - that is the absence of oxygen. Under certain conditions, grapes *could* be crushed, bringing juice into contact with yeast on the grape skin, and ferment, but the result would never be called *wine* under any stretch of the imagination. Could this be consumed? Of course ! Would this be enjoyable - only to one who regularly enjoys rotten, semi-fermented, oxidised fruit. -- st.helier |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Salut/Hi Mark,
I've just read through this thread, and although I hesitate to disagree with Josh, (and I don't really) I think he's left you with slightly the wrong impression. le/on Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:55:01 -0400, tu disais/you said:- >I was always under the impression that grapes, left to themselves, >will rot and turn into wine. Firstly, you describe two entirely different processes. Left to themselves, grapes very probably WILL rot. If they do, they won't turn into wine. (First process) The rotting mass might just ferment a bit, since yeasts (the micro-organisms responsible for turning sugar into alcohol) do occur naturally on grape skins. (Second process). However, a rotting oozing mess, with a low alcohol content, which is turning vinegary almost as fast as it ferments, is a long way from wine. The production of wine (as St Helier says) involves the deliberate modification/interruption of the natural processes I described above. If you are defining wine as the end result of any fermentation process that contains alcohol, then you would have to include beer, bread and rum! Clearly that definition won't do. > However, a friend of mine recently told >me that wine must undergo a very specific fermentation process to make >it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. That's much closer to the truth, although as I said above, yeasts DO occur naturally, and IF you were to pile up a load of grape bunches in a large vat (especially if you were to crush them by stamping on them) you certainly could get wine. For a good description of the process, try almost any of Hugh Johnson's books on wine. "The History of Wine" "Wine". Even the "World Atlas of Wine" has some information. -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian Hoare > wrote:
> Salut/Hi Mark, > > I've just read through this thread, and although I hesitate to disagree with > Josh, (and I don't really) I think he's left you with slightly the wrong > impression. > > le/on Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:55:01 -0400, tu disais/you said:- > > >I was always under the impression that grapes, left to themselves, > >will rot and turn into wine. > > Firstly, you describe two entirely different processes. > > Left to themselves, grapes very probably WILL rot. If they do, they won't > turn into wine. (First process) > > The rotting mass might just ferment a bit, since yeasts (the micro-organisms > responsible for turning sugar into alcohol) do occur naturally on grape > skins. (Second process). > > However, a rotting oozing mess, with a low alcohol content, which is turning > vinegary almost as fast as it ferments, is a long way from wine. > > The production of wine (as St Helier says) involves the deliberate > modification/interruption of the natural processes I described above. If > you are defining wine as the end result of any fermentation process that > contains alcohol, then you would have to include beer, bread and rum! > Clearly that definition won't do. > > > However, a friend of mine recently told >me that wine must undergo a very > > specific fermentation process to make > >it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. > > That's much closer to the truth, although as I said above, yeasts DO occur > naturally, and IF you were to pile up a load of grape bunches in a large vat > (especially if you were to crush them by stamping on them) you certainly > could get wine. > > For a good description of the process, try almost any of Hugh Johnson's > books on wine. "The History of Wine" "Wine". Even the "World Atlas of Wine" > has some information. Thanks to all of you for your polite and informative replies. It's nice to be able to ask a newbie question with having to undergo a verbal lynching. Just to make sure I'm understanding everything correctly: grapes left to themselves may indeed eventually turn into some remote semblance of an alcoholic beverage, but only in a purely legalistic definition, because the end product would be nothing any sane human would dare consume. Is that accurate? Thanks again! |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:07:35 -0400, Mark > wrote:
>Just to make sure I'm understanding everything correctly: grapes left >to themselves may indeed eventually turn into some remote semblance of >an alcoholic beverage, but only in a purely legalistic definition, >because the end product would be nothing any sane human would dare >consume. Is that accurate? I think it depends what you mean by "left to themselves". I think if you have clean conditions and good whole grapes you could be OK as far as the fermentation is concerned. You would still have to press the result, and clarify the liquid, before your "sane person" would drink it. -- Steve Slatcher http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:07:35 -0400, Mark > wrote:
>Just to make sure I'm understanding everything correctly: grapes left >to themselves may indeed eventually turn into some remote semblance of >an alcoholic beverage, but only in a purely legalistic definition, >because the end product would be nothing any sane human would dare >consume. Is that accurate? I think it depends what you mean by "left to themselves". I think if you have clean conditions and good whole grapes you could be OK as far as the fermentation is concerned. You would still have to press the result, and clarify the liquid, before your "sane person" would drink it. -- Steve Slatcher http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 10:38:42 +0100, Steve Slatcher
> wrote: >Hmmm. Except of course the standard practice in the Beaujolais Crus >is pretty much to chuck whole bunches of uncrushed grapes into a vat >and wait for the mass to ferment. The only nuances on this are, >AFAIK, to ensure a sterile vat in the first place to discourage the >action of batcteria, and to pump-over to get a good extraction of >colour. Oh, and I guess it is important that the CO2 (given off by the yeast-fermentation of the grapes that get crushed at the bottom) stays in the vat to encourage the fermentation of (and presumably to prevent bacterial infection in) those at the top. -- Steve Slatcher http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Salut/Hi Mark,
le/on Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:07:35 -0400, tu disais/you said:- >> > However, a friend of mine recently told >me that wine must undergo a very >> > specific fermentation process to make >> >it "alcoholic," if that's the right word. >> >> That's much closer to the truth, although as I said above, yeasts DO occur >> naturally, and IF you were to pile up a load of grape bunches in a large vat >> (especially if you were to crush them by stamping on them) you certainly >> could get wine. >> >> For a good description of the process, try almost any of Hugh Johnson's >> books on wine. "The History of Wine" "Wine". Even the "World Atlas of Wine" >> has some information. > >Thanks to all of you for your polite and informative replies. It's >nice to be able to ask a newbie question with having to undergo a >verbal lynching. In general, here in this NG, we all remember the time we were newbies, and we all remember the help, encouragement and tasting opportunities more experienced wine lovers gave us. However, we (I) can be short with people who, under the guise - or more often the pretense - of being newbies, either seek to provoke or to proselytize. >Just to make sure I'm understanding everything correctly: grapes left >to themselves may indeed eventually turn into some remote semblance of >an alcoholic beverage, but only in a purely legalistic definition, >because the end product would be nothing any sane human would dare >consume. Is that accurate? Nearly. Left to themselves, they'll go to vinegar and thence to carbon dioxide and water. If, about half way through, you were to press the mush, you would get some liquid which contained some alcohol. Fermentation is but one (fairly early) stage in the decomposition and decay of grapes. You have to differentiate between the "end product", ie when the reacting mass reaches relative stability (which will contain no alcohol) and the intermediate stage, after most of the fermentation has taken place and before other reactions have gone too far. I get the impression you're engaged elsewhere with a discussion which may just have theological overtones. A piece of advice. Fundamentalist theology has no connection wth reason. NEVER engage in such arguments. A logical system which defines and measures reality by the extent to which it conforms to statements in any kind of religious book or religious "tradition", has no connection with any rational process. You might as well try to discuss the laws of thermodynamics with a tree. One could (using good fundamentalist logic) make a perfectly good case to show that the hurricanes attacking Florida are a warning to Jed Bush, and that the attacks against the USA are a mark of God's anger over GW Bush's election. After all, that's just what the Bible says happened to the Jews when they left the straight and narrow. I don't believe that for a moment, but it is the sort of simplistic argument that gets used by fundamentalists of all religions. Bringing this back on topic, therefore, and condensing the answers. If it be hypothetically true that the decomposition of grapes could, when interrupted at exactly the right moment allow an alcoholic liquid to be extracted, a) you couldn't call it wine, and b) it is only an early stage in a process leading to the production of CO2 and water. >Thanks again! -- All the Best Ian Hoare http://www.souvigne.com mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Fermentation question | Winemaking | |||
slow fermentation question | Winemaking | |||
Fermentation Question | Winemaking | |||
Fermentation question | Winemaking | |||
Fermentation question | Winemaking |