Hugh Fearnley Half-Wit ingstall
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Elderflower Champs, sugar question.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by lockwood1956 View PostElderflower Champagne
Makes 24 bottles
Ingredients
About 24-30 elderflower heads, in full bloom
2kg sugar
4 litres hot water
Juice and zest of four lemons
1-2 tablespoons white wine vinegar
A pinch of dried yeast (you may not need this)
Method
Put the hot water and sugar into a large container (a spotlessly clean bucket is good) and stir until the sugar dissolves, then top up with cold water to 6 litres. Add the lemon juice and zest, the vinegar and the flower heads and stir gently. Cover with clean muslin and leave to ferment in a cool, airy place for a couple of days. Take a look at the brew at this point, and if it’s not becoming a little foamy and obviously beginning to ferment, add a pinch of yeast.
Leave the mixture to ferment, again covered with muslin, for a further four days. Strain the liquid through a sieve lined with muslin and decant into sterilised glass bottles. Seal and leave to ferment in the bottles for a further eight days before serving, chilled.
I dont think the above is a good recipe at all...
try this variation:
The flower petals only from the 24-30 elderflowers (shake the florets into a brown paper bag, if they dont shake off easily they aren't ready for use, and be sure to use the nice smelling ones, some smell a bit like cat pee)
1 litre white grape juice
1tsp yeast nutrient
Sugar to 1.070
juice and zest of the 4 lemons (no pith at all)
NO WHITE WINE VINEGAR
good quality wine yeast.
Method
Put the hot water and sugar into a large container (a spotlessly clean bucket is good) and stir until the sugar dissolves, then top up with cold water to 6 litres. Allow to cool, then, Add the lemon juice and zest, and the flower heads and stir gently. , preferable made as a yeast starter earlier. Cover and leave to ferment to dry, rack and bottle into champagne bottles or strong PET bottles, priming with 1 tsp sugar per bottle
NO ORDINARY WINE BOTTLES!!....THEY WILL EXPLODE.... anyone advising you otherwise is a total idiot
You may add non fermentable sugar at this stage to have a slightly sweeter wine, or use wine sweetener, as long as it is the type that doesn't contain potassium sorbate.
Once the sparkly is primed, you can use the champagne method and turn the bottles upside down and give them a sharp twist every day, once the yeast deposit has settled in the neck of the bottle, you can pop them in the freezer, for around 1.5 to 2 hours, remove the cap, and take out the yeast deposit, it may pop out on its own,(do it over the sink) you can then top up, and refrigerate before serving. Alternatively you can just be careful pouring, as you would with a bottle conditioned beer.
Hope that helps
regards
Bob
The first one I opened blew the stopper out with a huge bang as soon as I'd made the last twist on the champagne cage. The rest of the bottles I had to keep the freezer to tame down before opening. They were beautifully sparkling but the wine was a bit bland. I could taste the lemon rind (and some lime rind, which didn't help) but not much else, though fortunately the bubbles & acidity of the carbon dioxide made up for the lack of everything else.
I tried another gallon, adapting it with 1 litre cheap apple juice and a small amount of fruit in a muslin bag (red grapes, pears, one apple). This time I used a hydrometer (newly purchased) and bottled at about 1.006 with a teaspoon of priming sugar per bottle. It's a better wine but much less sparkling, still too weak, and still a bit bland. I don't know why, but the champagne yeast seems to have got stuck.
If there were enough fresh elderflowers around, I'd have a go at an elderflower champagne based on wine number one (using only clear fruit juices), with late addition of flowers and also probably with a small muslin bag of bashed grapes added for a couple of days at the start, for a bit of astringency and bite (or tannin instead).Last edited by blackcurrant; 05-07-2010, 01:59 PM.
Comment
-
Bottled at 1.006 with more sugar??? Eek. What was your starting gravity on that too? The champagne yeast (what brand etc was it) may well have got stuck.
If you're intending to make some decent sparkling wine there is a book out there tittle 'making sparkling wines' or similar, will check when I get home. It's very informative and has the proper procedure to follow. Duffbeer has also done a tutorial on here for it.
Comment
-
Also, the stopper blowing out with a huge bang, be very careful with your new glass hand-grenades. I now use welding gloves and a face shield when handling my charged up sparkly bottles whilst preparing and disgorging etc. I may look a little odd in them, but I still have all my fingers at the moment.
Edit: nice filter word replacement..
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rich View PostBottled at 1.006 with more sugar??? Eek. What was your starting gravity on that too? The champagne yeast (what brand etc was it) may well have got stuck.
If you're intending to make some decent sparkling wine there is a book out there tittle 'making sparkling wines' or similar, will check when I get home. It's very informative and has the proper procedure to follow. Duffbeer has also done a tutorial on here for it.
I used this yeast:
The Home Brew Shop UK a specialist Online homebrew supplier of home beer brewing kits wine cider kits and all the homebrewing grains and hops you need
I'm not certain the hydrometer was 1006, but it was definitely into the coloured band labelled as time to bottle beer. As the "wine" isn't much stronger than beer, I was pretty much following beer-making techniques with respect to bottling. Anyway it's pretty flat, despite the sugar, which is a bit of a disappointment as I prefer very sparkling, even if it means freezing the bottles to tame them before opening. There's nothing worse than "mildly sparkling" in my opinion (except explosive, perhaps).
Bill Smith's book on wine-making has a good chapter on making bubbly with elaborate instructions on removing the plug of yeast etc. I think going to such great lengths is a bit too fussy - I prefer the approach of a beer maker as I don't mind a bit of yeast i the bottom.
Comment
-
I think this is the book Rich referred to. I have a copy and it is really useful:
Pete the Instructor
It looks like Phil Donahue throwing up into a tuba
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rich View PostBottled at 1.006 with more sugar??? Eek. What was your starting gravity on that too? The champagne yeast (what brand etc was it) may well have got stuck.
If you're intending to make some decent sparkling wine there is a book out there tittle 'making sparkling wines' or similar, will check when I get home. It's very informative and has the proper procedure to follow. Duffbeer has also done a tutorial on here for it.
Comment
-
Making good quality sparkly is very time consuming and requires a lot of effort, but the end result is worth it.
I disgorge mine, not because im fussy, but because i want to have the whole bottle and not waste the bit with the sediment.
If attempting sparkly it is absolutely vital that short cuts are not taken, as we are dealing with what can become glass hand grenades. Sparkly is for experienced winemakers, and I wish Hugh fearnely wittingstall would stop handing out dangerous advice. Bottling at 1.006 is dangerous, there are potentially 16 hydrometer points left to drop, and if you are adding sugar too then you potentially have even more CO2 production.
You must understand what level of CO2 you are going to produce, or you are in danger of serious injury to yourself, or anyone else who passes by those bottles (I kid you not)
regards
BobN.G.W.B.J.
Member of 5 Towns Wine and Beer Makers Society (Yorkshire's newest)
Wine, mead and beer maker
Comment
-
Originally posted by goldseal View PostI think this is the book Rich referred to. I have a copy and it is really useful:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Making-Spark...8404188&sr=8-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by lockwood1956 View PostMaking good quality sparkly is very time consuming and requires a lot of effort, but the end result is worth it.
I disgorge mine, not because im fussy, but because i want to have the whole bottle and not waste the bit with the sediment.
If attempting sparkly it is absolutely vital that short cuts are not taken, as we are dealing with what can become glass hand grenades. Sparkly is for experienced winemakers, and I wish Hugh fearnely wittingstall would stop handing out dangerous advice. Bottling at 1.006 is dangerous, there are potentially 16 hydrometer points left to drop, and if you are adding sugar too then you potentially have even more CO2 production.
You must understand what level of CO2 you are going to produce, or you are in danger of serious injury to yourself, or anyone else who passes by those bottles (I kid you not)
regards
Bob
Have a look at this chart:
NOTE: This chart has been updated with the latest BJCP style guidelines; please see the new chart here: Beer Styles – Original Gravity and Final Gravity Chart – 2017 Update Beer comes in a wide range of malt/hop flavor balance and alcohol level. This chart shows the BJCP beer styles and their original gravity and
You can see that the FGs are much higher than in wines. If I follow sparkling wine guidelines with an OG of 1055 I'll end up with a totally flat wine.Last edited by blackcurrant; 06-07-2010, 09:30 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by blackcurrant View PostI'm trying to find info on the internet regarding the safe end gravity for bottling beer or cider
some people bottle just at the end of ferment and use this to create the bubbles, but it doesn't always work, as the ferment could stall.
Make sure the sugar is all gone from your ferment (and not just ferment stuck) and then prime....Bill Smith advises not to use wine above SG 0.995 for bottling.
hope this answers your question
regards
BobN.G.W.B.J.
Member of 5 Towns Wine and Beer Makers Society (Yorkshire's newest)
Wine, mead and beer maker
Comment
-
Originally posted by blackcurrant View PostThe HFW recipe isn't anything like as strong as true sparkling wine.
his recipe is absolutely flawed in almost every way. I understand completely that it is very low alcohol, but if those yeasties in there are hungry still....they will eat the priming sugar.
This is a message not just in answer to your post, but for newbie winemakers who may be tempted into sparkly production by the lure of Hugh Fearnleys recipe, and the claim that it is easy.......
Well.....it isnt, and I hear every year on other forums about exploding bottles, and everyone seems to regard it as funny.......
thats because they were lucky enough not to have been within 10 fooot of it when it exploded. To make sparkly safely, you must understand the process fully. And not over or under prime.
hap hazard method makes poor wine, and in HFW's case, potentially dangerous wine.
(down from soap box now)
it just really worries me that 100's perhaps even 1,000's of people are trying his dodgy recipe, will give up because it makes poor wine, or worse still damages their carpets airing cupboards or even worse, injures one of them. Sparkling wine makers were often recognisable by missing ingers and eyes, so even the pros got it wrong occasionallyN.G.W.B.J.
Member of 5 Towns Wine and Beer Makers Society (Yorkshire's newest)
Wine, mead and beer maker
Comment
-
Originally posted by blackcurrant View Post
You can see that the FGs are much higher than in wines. If I follow sparkling wine guidelines with an OG of 1055 I'll end up with a totally flat wine.
the wine ferments to dry......the final gravity likely being 0.990 to 0.995 (you cannot get beer this low, for reasons i wont go into just now, but its to do with attenuation being quite different in beers)
then you prime in bottle to create the CO2, the wine is flat before priming, that's why we are priming.
All you need is a wine that has fermented out all of the sugar, with the yeast still hungry (ie not reached alc tolerance) then you prime which feeds the yeast and creates the fizz, we can create exactly the right fizz by adding the correct priming dose of sugar which is 11g per bottle maximum.
hope this helps
regards
BobLast edited by lockwood1956; 06-07-2010, 10:02 AM.N.G.W.B.J.
Member of 5 Towns Wine and Beer Makers Society (Yorkshire's newest)
Wine, mead and beer maker
Comment
-
Originally posted by lockwood1956 View PostYou need to be sure the ferment has eaten all of the sugar up, then you can prime with a measured dose of sugar (max 11g per bottle) to give you the right carbonation level.
some people bottle just at the end of ferment and use this to create the bubbles, but it doesn't always work, as the ferment could stall.
Make sure the sugar is all gone from your ferment (and not just ferment stuck) and then prime....Bill Smith advises not to use wine above SG 0.995 for bottling.
hope this answers your question
regards
Bob
Comment
-
Originally posted by lockwood1956 View Postthe strength of the wine has absolutely no bearing on the amount of CO2 produced in bottle, that is all to do with the amount of sugar used in priming.
his recipe is absolutely flawed in almost every way. I understand completely that it is very low alcohol, but if those yeasties in there are hungry still....they will eat the priming sugar.
This is a message not just in answer to your post, but for newbie winemakers who may be tempted into sparkly production by the lure of Hugh Fearnleys recipe, and the claim that it is easy.......
Well.....it isnt, and I hear every year on other forums about exploding bottles, and everyone seems to regard it as funny.......
thats because they were lucky enough not to have been within 10 fooot of it when it exploded. To make sparkly safely, you must understand the process fully. And not over or under prime.
hap hazard method makes poor wine, and in HFW's case, potentially dangerous wine.
(down from soap box now)
it just really worries me that 100's perhaps even 1,000's of people are trying his dodgy recipe, will give up because it makes poor wine, or worse still damages their carpets airing cupboards or even worse, injures one of them. Sparkling wine makers were often recognisable by missing ingers and eyes, so even the pros got it wrong occasionally
Comment
Comment