Hi everyone,

Another question. Immediately following crushing of the grapes, I took
a hydrometer reading which (adjusted for temperature) indicated an S.G.
1.092, or about 23 Brix. My impression is that the must wasn't
well-stirred at that point, and it's possible it was inaccurate.

After 3 days in cold-soak, and after carefully stirring the must, a
second reading now shows around S.G. 1.098, or about 24.5 Brix (MUCH
more desirable, but...)

My question is, to what extent might disintegrated pomace in the sample
be artificially boosting the S.G. reading? I'm thinking that might have
something to do with the .06 jump in the reading, but could it also
have to do with the sample having been better mixed this time?

Thoughts?

Thanks so much!

David

On Oct 17, 7:12 pm, "David" > wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Another question. Immediately following crushing of the grapes, I took
> a hydrometer reading which (adjusted for temperature) indicated an S.G.
> 1.092, or about 23 Brix. My impression is that the must wasn't
> well-stirred at that point, and it's possible it was inaccurate.
>
> After 3 days in cold-soak, and after carefully stirring the must, a
> second reading now shows around S.G. 1.098, or about 24.5 Brix (MUCH
> more desirable, but...)
>
> My question is, to what extent might disintegrated pomace in the sample
> be artificially boosting the S.G. reading? I'm thinking that might have
> something to do with the .06 jump in the reading, but could it also
> have to do with the sample having been better mixed this time?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks so much!
>
> David

Could be either - take a sample in a bigger container and let it settle
for 1-2 hrs, then measure the sg.

Pp

Maybe I am mistaking but aren't you in the process of pulp-fermenting ????
So the lees are still in the must. And therefore you will be extrating
colour, flavour and tannins from the must and therefore would the SG go up........

Excuse my poor English, I am from Holland

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 19:12:35 -0700, David wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Another question. Immediately following crushing of the grapes, I took
> a hydrometer reading which (adjusted for temperature) indicated an S.G.
> 1.092, or about 23 Brix. My impression is that the must wasn't
> well-stirred at that point, and it's possible it was inaccurate.
>
> After 3 days in cold-soak, and after carefully stirring the must, a
> second reading now shows around S.G. 1.098, or about 24.5 Brix (MUCH
> more desirable, but...)
>
> My question is, to what extent might disintegrated pomace in the sample
> be artificially boosting the S.G. reading? I'm thinking that might have
> something to do with the .06 jump in the reading, but could it also
> have to do with the sample having been better mixed this time?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks so much!
>
> David

Hi Luc,

> Maybe I am mistaking but aren't you in the process of pulp-fermenting ????
> So the lees are still in the must. And therefore you will be extrating
> colour, flavour and tannins from the must and therefore would the SG go up........

Yes, I macerated for three days and pitched a culture. About 3 days
into ferment right now, and the must/wine has already dropped to 1.032
and going fast. A good temperature, about 80F, right now.

S.G. measures the density of the dissolved solution, and is primarily
affected by sugar content. S.G. isn't affected too much from flavors,
colors, or tannins, as they constitute a microscopic amount as compared
with the sugars.

My thinking is, it shouldn't be affected much by any of the
free-floating pulp. That was my question, but I more or less figured it
out using the following analogy... If you're floating in a swimming
pool, and someone dumps in a bunch of objects -- like apples, wood
blocks, rocks, etc -- that doesn't affect your buoyancy. So I wouldn't
think the pulp would affect the hydrometer's read (by very much, if
any).

I wonder what the rest of you think?...

Thanks,

David