Brix Conversion

From WTSO:

Varietal Composition: 100% Sangiovese Grosso
Harvest Dates: First half of September
Brix: 22°
Fermentation: In stainless steel; 20 days maceration at 86°F
Barrel Aging: 36 months in large Slavonian oak
Filtration: Unfiltered
Bottled: July 2007
Cases Imported: 1,700 (12/750ml)
Alcohol: 14.5%

If this is true it is a very efficient conversion at roughly 66%. By most estimates 22 brix should yield about 12%.

Assuming both are reported correctly what factors would result in such a high conversion? I know some yeast are suppose to have a higher efficiency and I guess they could have added sugar but beyond that I am clueless.

According to the following table http://www.brsquared.org/wine/CalcInfo/HydSugAl.htm, which uses 5 different equations for calculating potential alcohol, one could say either they added sugar or there's a typo, however, alcohol content rises during aging in oak barrels. During 36 months in oak barrels, water evaporates through the wood, thus concentrating everything else, including the alcohol.

, alcohol content rises during aging in oak barrels. During 36 months in oak barrels, water evaporates through the wood, thus concentrating everything else, including the alcohol.

Thanks. I did not know this. I would have thought that it would not change much and if at all would decrease slighlty assuming that it would be more likley to evaporate or be absorbed into the wood.

From WTSO:

Varietal Composition: 100% Sangiovese Grosso
Harvest Dates: First half of September
Brix: 22°
Fermentation: In stainless steel; 20 days maceration at 86°F
Barrel Aging: 36 months in large Slavonian oak
Filtration: Unfiltered
Bottled: July 2007
Cases Imported: 1,700 (12/750ml)
Alcohol: 14.5%

If this is true it is a very efficient conversion at roughly 66%. By most estimates 22 brix should yield about 12%.
Assuming both are reported correctly what factors would result in such a high conversion? I know some yeast are suppose to have a higher efficiency and I guess they could have added sugar but beyond that I am clueless.

It's probably not an overly efficient sugar-->alcohol conversion that's the culprit. Probably the 22Brix is not an accurate figure. It's probably just a sampling average that they took at harvest.
Even if it's the tank sample taken after the grapes have been crushed and before fermentation starts, it's not uncommon for the tank sample Brix to rise by several degrees as more sugar
is soaked out of the crushed grapes.
That's my story...and I'm stickin' to it. Isn't there some way we can blame the high alcohol conversion on Parker??
Tom

My understanding is that the relative evaporation of water or alcohol depends on the cellar humidity. If the cellar is strongly humidified it can reduce alcohol by as much as 1% by volume(!).

As for evaporation of alcohol or water I agree with Oliver, depends on humidity. It also might have something to do with the amount of alcohol vapor in the cellar atmosphere. As for the Brix number, I agree with Tom, that number could have been derived from a field sample where Brix was the only thing evaluated.

Salute

I says fermentationin stainless steel. In an open topped tank wine can lose up to 2% alc during fermentation, so probably the tank was closed.

I've been having trouble finding specifics, but I did find this:

As a wine ages in barrel, water and/or alcohol is lost due to evaporation. What exactly is lost varies from barrel to barrel and site to site, depending upon the relative humidity and temperature of the wines during storage and how consistent these paratmeters remain. This ‘loss’ is known as the Angel’s Share because it is not ‘captured’ by any vessel – just lost ‘into the air’ . . .

The ‘ideal’ humidity level for long term barrel storage is about 70%. If the humidity level drops lower, then you end up evaporating more water out of your barrel then alcohol, thus slightly increasing the alcohol level of the wine that remains. If the humidity level is higher, you end up evaporating more alcohol from the barrel, thus slightly decreasing the alcohol level of the wine that remains.

from: http://www.tercerowines.com/wine-words/ ... els-share/

[David M. Bueker]

From my discussions with a number of winemakers back in 2004 (when I took a trip to the Santa Barbara region) as well as the Introduction to Wine Making course I took on-line/video from UC Davis, the old 55% efficiency for yeast has pretty much gone out the window (at least for cultured yeasts). 60%+ is not at all unusual these days, thus getting you close to the 14%. There is also chaptalization to be considered. You have no way of knowing if there was chaptalization (I don't know what the wine is, so I cannot comment on legalities) which would also raise the alcohol level.

22 Brix is not an overly ripe harvest, so depending on the specific region there very well may have been chaptalization.

There's a lot of factors at play here. The label only hints at one of them.

The wine is a 2003 Brunello. I forget which producer so I don't know if its from the north or south part of the district.

IMHO, most of you are overthinking this. Not that laws have never been broken in Italy, but chaptalization is as a rule illegal there, so that's an unlikely culprit. The suspect number that jumps out at me is the 22 Brix; there just aren't many reasons to be harvesting an Italian Sangiovese as early as the "first half of September" at sugar levels that low. So I'm with Tom - you don't need an exotic, technical explanation here. Most likely the quoted Brix is just wrong - either as Tom said from relying on a small sample or (more likely IMHO) a simple typo on the label.

[David M. Bueker]

Makes sense Mark, but until we knew what the wine was there were more possibilities.

Indeed I don't think anyone in Europe picked much of anything at 22 Brix in 2003.

David, that we now know the wine is a Brunello certainly adds information but we knew from the beginning of the thread that the grape involved was Sangiovese Grosso. I don't think it was too big a stretch from there to guess the wine was Italian!

[David M. Bueker]

True. Just don't know the rules for all the regions. Is chaptalization illegal across Italy?

True. Just don't know the rules for all the regions. Is chaptalization illegal across Italy?

David, AFAIK the answer to that is 'yes'. Call me cynical (I wouldn't blame you ) but I've observed a pattern to rules about chaptalization and acidification. To put it kindly, these rules are, shall we say, 'pragmatic': practices are only banned in areas where they would almost never be used anyway. So chaptalization is OK in parts of France (but generally not in the sunny south), in most of the US (but not in California) and illegal altogether in Italy, Australia and South Africa. Invert that list and you pretty can guess who forbids acidification.

The reasons I think the 22 Brix is a typo would apply in pretty much any year but, as you point out, especially in 2003. As Tom said, it's not rare for apparent sugar levels to rise after the crush. That especially goes for varieties like Zinfandel, notorious for uneven ripening. What amount to raisins in the mix cause higher sugar in the must than might have been apparent in the field. But 22 Brix would only get you 12% alcohol, even given 'modern' yeasts. That's the sort of level that would get winemakers in areas where it's allowed (Burgundy, Oregon) to think about adding sugar. But if an Italian winemaker (let alone a maker of Brunello) really thought he had 22 Brix, he would just postpone picking, probably off into October if necessary. The fact that this wine ended up with 14.5% alcohol despite being harvested in early September (if those numbers are correct) just re-emphasizes what a hot summer 2003 was. All of the info on the label make sense except the Brix number. That was true given the info in the OP and it's even more true now that we know it's a 2003 Brunello.

Could be that the 'Brix' was actually 'Babo,' the sugar measurement they use in Italy. 22 Babo is about right for the alcohol.

I think artificially raising alcohol was the last thing on an Italian producers' mind in '03. I have never heard of chaptalisation in Italy, which of course doesn't mean that there aren't cheeseballs doing it. Must concentration is another possibility, of course, but again not in '03.

Could be that the 'Brix' was actually 'Babo,' the sugar measurement they use in Italy. 22 Babo is about right for the alcohol.

That makes a lot of sense. Turns out that I still had the original WTSO e-mail on my home e-mail (I thought I had deleted it) and thought it would be easy to prove this to be the case. I found this importer sheet http://www.wilsondaniels.com/pdfs/VS%2003%20Brunello%20di%20Montalcino%20Small%20File.pdf and the information here is exactly as I originally posted from WTSO; 22 brix and 14.5% alcohol. Probably due to my poor internet search skills but I was not able to find any information from the source to confirm brix or Babo. However, I also found this http://www.vendemmia.ca/our-wines/wines/tenimentibrunello/ that states that the wine is only 13% alcohol which would be more in line with 22 brix.

I am just going to ignore the site that claims the wine is 13% alcohol and assume that 22 brix is not correct for any of the number of reasons cited in this string.

I have never heard of chaptalisation in Italy, which of course doesn't mean that there aren't cheeseballs doing it.

It's illegal there, which of course...

Yes, illegal, and as has been pointed out above for the most part it's hard to imagine the need for it, particularly these days. I was talking to one of my Barolo producers about alcohol levels: he's thinking of getting a cellar humidifier to reduce alcohol, which these days in low-yield wines is generally over 14.