Going to Cognac...

Recently found out I am going to Cognac in November. Cognac Bureau invited me to a four day Cognac Educators Trip. Since Portland and Cognac will probably be similar weather at that time of year (except Portland will likely be wetter), sounded like a good idea to me. Worst case, lots of warming cognac before the fire.

Took occasion to schedule the prior week in Bordeaux. Alex R. finally gets his chance to convince me of the dominance of Bordeaux up close and personal!

[Jenise]

How FUN. Lucky you, though I know it's diligence and not luck that has brought you these opportunities.

That "worst case" sounds pretty darn good!!

Have fun (as I know you will).

Have a fun and safe trip Hoke. One quick question- fruit that is destined and fermented to become Cognac if it is distilled using a column still (that more or less was “designed” to “duplicate” a double pot distill) could it be called Cognac?

Salute

Have a fun and safe trip Hoke. One quick question- fruit that is destined and fermented to become Cognac if it is distilled using a column still (that more or less was “designed” to “duplicate” a double pot distill) could it be called Cognac?

Salute

No, Victor. Cognac specifies that the alembic copper pot still must be used. And they even go into the specificities of style and capacity of the still, and it has to be inspected and certified for use, and then only in a specified date range. And the distillations, two, are to be conducted sequentially as two distinct distillations. The wording obviates any type of column still.

What's interesting is that neighboring Armagnac mandates an entirely different distillation process in a sorta/kinda amalgamation of what you describe, and what looks like a hybrid pot/column still contraption. The Armagnacoise still specifies only one distillation

Thanks Hoke. Is there much difference in “cask strength” of Cognac and Aramagnac?

Salute

Thanks Hoke. Is there much difference in “cask strength” of Cognac and Aramagnac?

Salute

Now that one I don't know. (maybe I will soon)

My instinct would be to say greater cask strength in cognac, but that's just instinct.

The only thing I can report authoritatively is that the bourbon rules require distillation no higher than 160 Proof, going in barrel at no higher than 125 Proof, and then being cut to desired proof (or uncut, if cask strength) prior to bottling.

In practice, most bourbons are distilled at around 140 Proof and most go into barrel between 110 and 125 Proof. Then in barrel, depending upon age and location in the warehouse, the whiskey will evaporate and concentrate to between 130 Proof and up to around 150 Proof generally.

Scotch, because of the longer/slower/colder/wetter conditions, is often less proof at cask strength.

Cognac and armagnac...I'll have to find out.

Victor: Received replies to all my (your questions)....

Maximum distillation for cognac is 72.4%abv; minimum is 70%abv...so not a great deal of leeway there by regulations.

Cognac goes into barrel at just below 70%, around 68 or 69%---but that is because of fire/safety regulations!

Armagnac, on the other hand, has a maximum distillation of 72%, and goes into barrel at 55-60%.

And that is from a cognac producer.

Thanks Hoke.

Salute

I would suspect that the narrow range of alcohol strength of Cognac has a lot to do with distillation techniques and method. (Doing single pot distillations you have better control). I have seen very elaborate (looking) but simple pot stills instead of discharging the distillate directly from the condenser the liquid is passed through another “gadget”. This basically looks like a large test tube with an inlet (towards the bottom of the tube) for the distillate to enter and fill up the tube and by the mouth of the tube an outlet to collect the distillate. Inside the tube floats a proof hydrometer. (Looks impressive that’s about it).

Salute

I would suspect that the narrow range of alcohol strength of Cognac has a lot to do with distillation techniques and method. (Doing single pot distillations you have better control). I have seen very elaborate (looking) but simple pot stills instead of discharging the distillate directly from the condenser the liquid is passed through another “gadget”. This basically looks like a large test tube with an inlet (towards the bottom of the tube) for the distillate to enter and fill up the tube and by the mouth of the tube an outlet to collect the distillate. Inside the tube floats a proof hydrometer. (Looks impressive that’s about it).

Salute

Erm...I might question the point about having better control in a pot still rather than a column still, Victor. Technically, there is much finer control in what you pull off (what you leave in and what you leave out) in a column still than a pot still. With the multitude of plates and the ability to heat each plate to a different point, and separate collector/condensors for each plate, along with reflux valves, you can precisely control exactly what comes off your still run.

With a pot still, you *pretty* much control what you keep and dismiss from your run, but you don't have all that much an indicator except for the heat of the single stream that is coming out of the condenser.

And yes, I've seen lots of bells and gadgets that do very little but look good on some stills.

Erm...I might question the point about having better control in a pot still rather than a column still, Victor. Technically, there is much finer control in what you pull off (what you leave in and what you leave out) in a column still than a pot still. With the multitude of plates and the ability to heat each plate to a different point, and separate collector/condensors for each plate, along with reflux valves, you can precisely control exactly what comes off your still run.

With a pot still, you *pretty* much control what you keep and dismiss from your run, but you don't have all that much an indicator except for the heat of the single stream that is coming out of the condenser.

Spot on, Hoke. In my business, the most sensitive distillations are carried out using "spinning band" columns. Fractionation to a tenth of a degree can be managed on such apparatus (actually, it's usually expressed as height equivalent to a theoretical plate).

Mark Lipton

Erm...I might question the point about having better control in a pot still rather than a column still, Victor. Technically, there is much finer control in what you pull off (what you leave in and what you leave out) in a column still than a pot still. With the multitude of plates and the ability to heat each plate to a different point, and separate collector/condensors for each plate, along with reflux valves, you can precisely control exactly what comes off your still run.

With a pot still, you *pretty* much control what you keep and dismiss from your run, but you don't have all that much an indicator except for the heat of the single stream that is coming out of the condenser.

Spot on, Hoke. In my business, the most sensitive distillations are carried out using "spinning band" columns. Fractionation to a tenth of a degree can be managed on such apparatus (actually, it's usually expressed as height equivalent to a theoretical plate).

Mark Lipton

Do I get an "A"??????

(Thanks, Mark. Always nice to know when I spout informatively and manage to be correct at the same time.)

Now you’re getting into the realm of fractional stills and fractional distillation. I was talking about pot stills and pot/ reflux column stills. Does the AOC Armagnac allow fractional distillation, or just pot / reflux column distillation?

Salute

Now you’re getting into the realm of fractional stills and fractional distillation. I was talking about pot stills and pot/ reflux column stills. Does the AOC Armagnac allow fractional distillation, or just pot / reflux column distillation?

Salute

Armagnac allows only the Armagnacoise still, an interesting looking combination, appearing something like a primitive melding of a modified pot and column still with a condenser coil. And yes, it does have reflux. And only one distillation allowed.

It's a cylindrical "pot" with a short column atop (where the reflux goes), which allows for recirculation of distiller's beer/low wine so you get full distillation during a single cook.

And----technically---any still is a fractional still. Whatever you get (and keep) for a pot still is a fraction of what you started with; the other fraction being what you didn't keep. The rest is just fine tuning your fractions.

I get what you mean, Victor----but one of the nice things of being here in Oregon is I get to hang around with a lot of craft distillers. And most of them use pot stills, mostly because they want to, but also because they have to (expense). Most craft distillers, though they love the pot stills and the product they get from them, get to a point where they really wouldn't mind the luxury of working with continuous stills----again, better control achieved with considerably less time spent, and considerably greater volume opportunities.

Hi Hoke,
In Brandy production the goal is to produce a moderate alcoholic spirit with “lots” of “good” flavors and aromas. (Unlike producing “added flavored” spirits where a higher alcoholic spirit that is more “neutral” is most ‘desirable). IMHO the pot still seems the best way to go (this is what I meant by having more control).
I was just wondering if anyone actually did a taste comparison of fruit that was destined to become Cognac that was double pot distilled and single pot/reflux column distilled? (Not the finished product but the distillate collected). The producers of Armagnac (who basically do a single distillation using a pot/reflux column still) claim that their “spirit” also maintains “good” flavors and aromas.
I figured that the Cognac AOC will control or regulate every aspect in the production of wine destined to become Cognac. I never visited the Cognac region, but after looking at photographs of some Cognac distillation facilities and looking at some of the “swan necks” I noticed some of them were “stretching” it just a little. (You never see cooling tubes wrapped around them, but circulating ambient air around them might just be enough to see some “reflux”). Seems to me some of those “necks” could possible see some more “reflux” action than others.

Salute