Pear Wine and/or Perry

[Aussie67]

Hi All,

Can anyone provide a recipe for pear wine and/or Perry?

My mother-in-Law has quite a few pears and it would be a shame to see them go to waste.

Also we have a juicer can that be of any use when making wine/perry?

You can probably guess that we are new to this

Thanks.

Aussie

[fatbloke]

Hi All,

Can anyone provide a recipe for pear wine and/or Perry?

My mother-in-Law has quite a few pears and it would be a shame to see them go to waste.

Also we have a juicer can that be of any use when making wine/perry?

You can probably guess that we are new to this

Thanks.

Aussie

Well a basic recipe, using cider as an analogy (due to the similarity to traditional cider making) would be just to mill all the pears i.e. crush/pulp etc (I often use the magimix but the thermo cut out often means that it stops after 20 kg or so).

That goes into a bucket with 1 campden tablet (crushed) per 2 gallons of pulp, along with 1 teaspoon of pectolase (from the nearest homebrew shop) per gallon of pulp. I normally leave that for as long as a week - it doesn't really matter about any oxidation/browning as that will help with the colour of the finished product.

Then the pulp needs to be pressed/squeezed. That gives you the juice/must to ferment.

The local HBS should also stock a yeast suitable for cider/perry. The must will have to go into a fermenter - a plastic bucket type from the HBS will do the job - or maybe a glass demi-john.

I then follow the yeast instructions and pitch the yeast (either dry if that's whats suggested or rehydrated - the packet should mention which).

Then it's stoppered with a bubbler/fermentation valve and bung.

As I say, I use a very basic method for just a cider.

There's plenty of other methods.

Oh and you should really get a hydrometer and jar (for testing) as you'd be better knowing what the gravity of the juice is at the start and what it finishes as - perries and ciders are often about 6 to 8 % ABV.

When the ferment has finished (3 identical test readings on 3 consecutive days as a reasonable guide). Then the perry would be racked/syphoned off the lees/sediment into another jar (stoppered in the same way) and left to clear - though you can always use finings to clear it quickly (from the HBS).

You've then got basic, still perry. If you find that it's too dry for your taste, you can back sweeten it with a non-fermentable sweetener, maybe artificial or something like lactose. Obviously you'd do that carefully and gradually until you know how much you need to add to get the taste you like.

If you wanted to carbonate it you'll need beer bottles to put it in, along with a small amount of fermentable sugar of some sort (table sugar will do, as would dextrose/glucose/brewing sugar - about 1/4 of a teaspoon per 500ml bottle). The bottles are capped and then kept somewhere warm for a couple of days, maybe a week and then put into cool storage somewhere.

You should end up with carbonated/sparkling perry.

If you want to look into it properly rather than just a "guesstimate" suggestion like mine, then google for "making perry" (check the "pages from the UK" radio button) and you may well find an easier suggestion or maybe a wine type recipe.

Oh and if you haven't got access to a press of some sort, you'll need a straining bag or some sort to get the juice out of the pulp. They can be got from the HBS, or you can also use a pair of womens tights (obviously new ones that have been sanitised). I've done that before. Then they, or the straining bag are squeezed (or wrung to be more accurate) until the pulp is as dry as you can get it (it's a messy job).

dunno if that lot helps any, but it's basically what I'd be doing (or have already done with the freebie apples that I've pillaged from various places this year).

regards

JtFB

p.s. erm I don't actually see why you couldn't use your juicer machine to get the juice out, but I'd still crush/mill it before hand and do the pectolase/campden thing with the fruit first. You can also freeze the fruit first, that helps get the juice out quicker and makes the crushing/milling easier (and you'd need to get pectolase into the recipe some how, to stop/prevent pectin hazes in the finished product - unless you want cloudy perry of course).

Then i'd be putting the pulp into the juicer - though I think it'd be quite a labourious process. Juicers are designed to work with maybe a glass or two of juice, not a couple of gallons......

And yes, it's quite normal to just wash the fruit off and mill/crush it whole, no peeling, de-seeding, coring etc. The skin, seeds and core provide some tannin to the batch.

[spritzer]

I have been given about 12kg's of apples...

I was going to make wine with them... but think I might try this John.. sounds quite easy

[fatbloke]

I have been given about 12kg's of apples...

I was going to make wine with them... but think I might try this John.. sounds quite easy

If you've got a copy of CJJ's "First Steps" book, there's a couple of recipes for apple wine in there, including one that uses about that much weight (sorry I haven't got my book to hand), where you crush the apples, add the pectolase and campden tablet(s?) and yeast, you keep stirring it a couple of times a day for something like a week, then it's something like straining/pressing the pulp, adding any sugar and fermenting.

It does use a lot of apples and gives a wine that has quite a cidery bouquet. I did that the year before last. It wasn't bad at all.

Or you could have a google for cider making etc and see what ideas/suggestions you get.

Either way, pressing/straining that much pulp does get a bit messy, but once you've got the juice seperated you can often make a few different flavours with whatever other fruit you can get cheap/free (frozen summer fruits or even tinned stuff). It makes a good variation i.e. apple and black currant, apple and raspberry, apple and whatever.

regards

JtFB

[Mel]

Saw this & thought I'd say hello on the subject as I've just ordered 3 Perry pear trees. They will take about 15 years to fruit , so it is a long term project. I use a juicer to make cider from my excess apples, I let them ferment with the natural yeasts and add nothing, I'm pleased with the results. I'm hoping to graft a load of local apples this year, some eaters and some cookers. Mainly for heritage purposes but I guess long term there will be cider potential too !

[lockwood1956]

I let them ferment with the natural yeasts and add nothing, I'm pleased with the results.

You realise of course that this is herecy!

I never allow natural yeasts to enter my ferments, they are unpredictable, and can ruin a wine in more ways than you can imagine....not least by petering out at low alcohol levels, not to mention the spoilage capacity of Klokera Apiculata (natural or wild yeast)

Try making a batch using natural yeasts and a batcch made with a yeast like lalvin D47 or 71B-1122 the difference is astounding.



You might want to try making some apple and elderflower.. ferment the apple to how you like it, and then when the elderflowers are fully open gather just a very very small palmful and add them to the finished wine, rack about a week later...yum scrum. you will be extracting the boquet using the alcohol present in the wine, this is how perfume is infused.

regards
Bob

[Mel]

Well all yeasts start off as natural yeasts That is why originally there were yeasts specific to areas, we just grow them on to try and rein them in. Unpredictable, yup maybe, but I like that unpredictable can also give a variety that predictable never finds. Given I don't like modern cider at all, I'm happy to stick to what I DO like. Many people who are dedicated to cider making only use wild yeasts present on the apples and most of them are far more skilled and experienced than I am. This is how cider was made historically and I am a very basic ingredients, away from chemicals kind of person

[lockwood1956]

well if it works for you thats fine


yes they were all originally region specific, but they are not the same as wild yeasts (Klokera Apiculata) they are from the Genus Saccaromyces cerevisae they were just cultivated in particular areas and then grown on from there. but they are predictable in terms of how they ferment, and the flavour profiles they induce, for example Lalvin 71B-1122 will metabolise up to 40% of the malic acid present (great if your apple crop wasnt particularly ripe and the malic acid levels are high)

All yeasts of this genus will ferment over 10% alcohol easily, and wine needs this level of alcohol for keeping properties. Some wild yeasts struggle to get over 5% alcohol, which is fine if you are going to drink it straight away



but each to their own, it would be a lesser world if we were all the same

[lockwood1956]

And before anyone says anything.......


i know I'm a GEEK ok?

[Duffbeer]

And before anyone says anything.......


i know I'm a GEEK ok?

Not at all, I agree, it is everyone to their own, but I must agree about the wild yeast thing and it's unpredictability is not good and no matter how ever you prepare, you can never expect the same results twice.
Mel, you have to remember 50% of that air born yeast is also air born spoilage bacteria such as brettanomyces, mycoderma or acetic bacteria.
Hygiene, incorporated with good cultured yeasts and general good wine making techniques will guarantee quality homemade wines every time.

[Mel]

Not wishing to sound picky but I believe it is actually Kloeckera apiculata. The interaction of naturally occuring yeasts is thought by many to give a many different tones to a wine, and has, after all served our brewing species for many thousands of years and only comparitivly recently have yeasts been bought in little packets
Kloeckera apiculata is generally overrun by other yeasts but is cited by many in being responsible for the sought after tastes. Interestingly lots of papers now suggest that suggesful "natural" yeast build up is contained within the fermenting area, eg found on walls etc, possibily as a build up over centuries. But most of that isn't so applicable to a home hobbiest esp if practising sterile condition. As you say each to their own , but as my interests tend towards more historical production of drink, food and what have you. I'm far more interested in the methodolgy employed in the past where differeing techniques were used in order to produce a result and a balance of natural forces rather than chemical interaction is more prevalent.

Duffbeer, I don't expect, nor indeed want, the same results twice. Wine making commercially shows us good and bad years so neither do the people producing commercially get the same thing twice. The unpredicatbility carries good & bad with it, sometimes it can be horrid (very rarely in my experience once you go with the art v science idea) but can also produce something unexpected as you step outside the box. Predictibility is safe, which is fine if that is what you want. But unpredictibility has its pros too

As I said historic methodology tends to be my main interest and whilst I can happily do the science, researching the pre literacy "art" methods for me is farv more intersting. And if we all agree what is the point of a discussion anyhow !

[Mamgiowl]

Interesting points there, Mel, and if it works for you well and good, but Sod's Law states that if I tried it I'd end up with vinegar or some such, so I'll stick to 'tame' yeasts. It's called 'progress' or 'evolution' and I'd rather be sure I was giving myself the best chance to make a drinkable wine as I can.

Anyhow, welcome to the forum and congratulations on having the patience of a saint with that 1986 Rice and Raisin.

[lockwood1956]

There are a growing number of wineries that actually like to start their ferments with wild yeasts and then introduce a commercial yeast to take over the fermentation, it is something I have read a few papers on, have decided to try, and then bottled out. It is thought, as you say to introduce complex boquet and taste profiles.

For me, I am a work backwards kind of winemaker, I decide stylistically, what I want to make, and plan backwards adjusting numbers accordingly. So these predictable yeasts are exactly what I'm looking for.

The wild yeasts suit your purposes and thats fine. (good spot on the spelling...and I dont mind picky at all ) as its all about making something you like to drink.

regards
Bob

[lockwood1956]

The main reason for concern regarding traditional brews is the sometimes dangerous practices employed

Mr Fearnley Whittingstall inspired new brewers with his nettle ale and Elderflower champagne.....
Frequenting another forum I saw that an awful lot of people had bottles explode because the methodology was unsound. (using standard bottles to prime brews)

So I generally dont like traditional methods (like adding bread yeast and marmite to a slice of toast and dumping it in your must, or fermenting in open top buckets etc) we have the science available to us and the tools for better Winemaking, so i feel it is better to use them.

my turn to be picky now you cannot sterilise in Winemaking, you can sanitise. One can produce a surface that is sterile for a moment, but then its exposed to air which contains contaminants (and wild yeasts ) I used to obsess with this, I now just do my best to get things clean and leave it at that. Im fact the longer I make wine the less obsessive I become, perhaps I'm on the path to traditional methods?

discussion is always good, I love it. the problem i see online in forums is discussion turns very easily into argument, something to do with the inflection and facial expression not being available to the "listener" however we are a civilised bunch on here
regards
bob

[Mamgiowl]

The main reason for concern regarding traditional brews is the sometimes dangerous practices employed

Mr Fearnley Whittingstall inspired new brewers with his nettle ale and Elderflower champagne.....
Frequenting another forum I saw that an awful lot of people had bottles explode because the methodology was unsound. (using standard bottles to prime brews)

So I generally dont like traditional methods (like adding bread yeast and marmite to a slice of toast and dumping it in your must, or fermenting in open top buckets etc) we have the science available to us and the tools for better Winemaking, so i feel it is better to use them.

my turn to be picky now you cannot sterilise in Winemaking, you can sanitise. One can produce a surface that is sterile for a moment, but then its exposed to air which contains contaminants (and wild yeasts ) I used to obsess with this, I now just do my best to get things clean and leave it at that. Im fact the longer I make wine the less obsessive I become, perhaps I'm on the path to traditional methods?

discussion is always good, I love it. the problem i see online in forums is discussion turns very easily into argument, something to do with the inflection and facial expression not being available to the "listener" however we are a civilised bunch on here
regards
bob

Well, we try to be.

I think the thing to remember is no offence is meant when there are different points of view, so none taken. If any is given the mods will be on the offender like a ton of bricks!