delayed malo ?

Brian G. posted this in Wine Talk, and I’m interested in the answer too.

"Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere. While waiting for ML to occur is the wine protected at all from O2? Standard practice is minimal sulfur until ML finishes as SO2 inhibits ML. Not a major concern during an active fermentation as the wine is pushing out gas and therefore resists air intake. But if the wine is just sitting the chance for oxidation is increased. Sitting on the lees will help the wine but that should also promote ML.

I know there are those out there practicing no or low sulfur wine making but have little understanding as to what practices they use to resist oxidation…"

Now that you mention it, I realize that I’ve never read about the O2 part of the equation at this stage. Microbial vulnerability is the more common concern here, I think. It seems likely that the wine is thoroughly CO2 saturated at this point, and I would think that even if it’s not perfectly blanketed, O2 uptake would be pretty slow.

Post press going into malo the wine is still pretty full of CO2 (pulling a sample and shaking it will cause the release of plenty of gas). Assuming the wine is barreled down at this point (immediately post press), I would imagine that the dissolved CO2 plus the relatively reductive environment of the barrel would be plenty to protect the wine even if MLF is delayed.

I understand the CO2 saturation but am unsure as to how long before it works its way out and leaves the wine vulnerable. The original question was in response to what I thought I read as a six month delay until MLF initiated naturally and when it would have normally initiated or been forced following completion of fermentation. If the wine is undisturbed, is six months a reasonable time to retain protective levels of CO2?

When wine goes for months and months (sometimes into spring/early summer) going through ML, I would worry about it, especially if you are doing things like putting the barrels in the sun/other methods of trying to warm them up, etc. The colder they are, the more the CO2 stays in solution in the wine, but if you are trying to warm them, that would be an issue. In addition to that, if it is months after primary, and the ML is going super slowly, yes, it will produce CO2, but at very low levels. In addition to the warming possibilities, are the barrels being stirred, or are they being left undisturbed? What variety is it? Super tannic, or less so, like Pinot? Is there are RS? What is the pH? There are lots of variables to consider.

We just dose our Pinots for Malo now, and it’s over in a week or so after primary fermentation is over, and then we smack it with So2, and take an nap!

The “practice used to resist oxidation” is generally known as “topping”. I mean, it’s generally not complicated - if you have healthy grapes and a healthy fermentation, one of the best ways to keep oxygen out of your wine is to top regularly so that, hey! your wine isn’t sitting around in contact with a bunch of oxygen.

My only (still limited) winemaking experience is with aging in barrel (without any sulfur at all, on the unstirred lees); I assume there are different practices if you’re aging in other containers, but the basic idea is the same. In my case the weather had already turned so the cellar was cold, and I had crazy high acid, so I just waited the winter out. Things warmed up in spring and the barrels went through malo and everything was just dandy.

I imagine it’s a different picture if you’re trying to hit a specific style or profile and have more time restrictions, or if you’re intervening in all of the ways that Linda mentioned. Otherwise, I don’t see it as a huge deal if you have good grapes (especially if you have good Pinot noir) and wait a while for the cellar to do its thing.

Thanks everyone. The wine in question is not mine so I can’t speak to the specific practices. The question originated from a burgundy thread over on wine talk. I asked since for my wines I have always been very concerned about getting MLF started quickly after fermentation ends limiting the time before I hit it with SO2. Sounds like I am being overly paranoid.

I’ve never made wine anywhere but here. But I recall hearing an anecdote (or antidote?) once to the general effect that in France (Burgundy?) it is preferred that ML proceed slowly, and that the wines waking up in the spring to resume ML is viewed as a positive (rather than finishing before winter is over or whatever). Or maybe I read that somewhere. I forget. Or maybe it’s some urban legend I now believe (along with the one about the girl with the beehive hairdo).

I have zero idea if this story is true. But every year I think of it as I monitor our ML progress.

I have my own view as to how I like our wines to proceed. Everyone sees things differently, but one absolute in wine is there is no certainty, except perhaps that if you ask five winemakers their opinion about how something should be done, you’ll get at least 7 answers.

There are many roads to Petaluma…

It all really depends. If you’re working in the same facility as a bunch of other winemakers, some of whom may be total kooks, it might be wise to be paranoid. On the other hand if you’re a kook and you’re working with one or two other similarly minded kooks (as in my case) you might be able to get away with native ferments/ML and low-to-no sulfur.

I dunno, I think it’s one of the reasons the other thread gets a little silly - there is no One True Way to make wine. I secondguess every decision I make in my winemaking. Some of that is inexperience, but I think a lot of it is just the nature of sheparding a living thing through the whole winemaking process as best you can. If I posted my winemaking (in)decisions for all to see, I’m sure people would tear them apart as well, regardless of the wine’s finished quality. I guess the old “better to remain silent and be thought a fool” quote applies to some degree.

I mentioned this in other threads, but when I lived in Paso I worked in a Zin house, and in the last few years I was there, I actually started doing mostly co-primary and secondary fermentations mainly due to the fact that zin tends to be high alcohol, and we were having some stuck ML issues. It worked great for me, and I saw no negative impact on quality. The only time I didn’t do it is if we brought in grapes after a rain, and I didn’t want to chance any extra bad microbial issues. I did this co-ferments on literally hundreds of lots.

I think the main argument I have heard for wanting delayed ML is so that they can delay adding SO2, because they might perceive some sort of improved quality by doing this. But really, everyone has lots that finish early, they SO2, put the wines to bed, and everything is fine. No? And if you really wanted to delay SO2, you could certainly do that, even if your ML was finished after harvest. If your cellar was cold, there was still residual CO2 from fermentation, and you kept the barrels topped, you could certainly go without for a while. There are so called “natural” winemakers who never add SO2. But hey, who am I to argue with a dilettante with no wine education who chose to move to France? [wow.gif]

I think the main argument I have heard for wanting delayed ML is so that they can delay adding SO2, because they might perceive some sort of improved quality by doing this. But really, everyone has lots that finish early, they SO2, put the wines to bed, and everything is fine. No? And if you really wanted to delay SO2, you could certainly do that, even if your ML was finished after harvest. [/quote]
I don’t remember exactly where I read this, and I’m not totally solid on the chemistry involved here, but I think that the reason you might want to delay both ML and SO2 adds is that both things scrub out aldehydes that you want present in the wine in the early period following fermentation to facilitate tannin-anthocyanin bonding.

I don’t remember exactly where I read this, and I’m not totally solid on the chemistry involved here, but I think that the reason you might want to delay both ML and SO2 adds is that both things scrub out aldehydes that you want present in the wine in the early period following fermentation to facilitate tannin-anthocyanin bonding.[/quote]

This would be a good question for the Clark Smith forum.

I don’t remember exactly where I read this, and I’m not totally solid on the chemistry involved here, but I think that the reason you might want to delay both ML and SO2 adds is that both things scrub out aldehydes that you want present in the wine in the early period following fermentation to facilitate tannin-anthocyanin bonding.[/quote]

This sounds right to me. Just finishing up a stability class at UC Davis where this was a topic of discussion.

I generally start to worry about lots that haven’t finished malo yet about now, but experience has shown me that certain vineyards and types of wines (especially the higher tannin, higher ‘minerality’ wines) tend to do fine with extended malo situations/no SO2 well into spring, while others I begin to freak out about in November. I haven’t bought malo culture in years. Seems like unnecessary use of funds that could be spent on other, more essential things. Per the other thread, the following summer is where you really begin to see other issues set in, and everything that isn’t very close in March gets attention.

LOL, Ian. Today (3/17) is actually the day that we began to actively deal with anything that has not yet finished. Starting to warm them up, etc.

Up 'till this point, the attitude was “meh”. As of today anything that hasn’t finished has my attention.

Not many. A few Cabs in the 0.4-0.5 g/L range and one Sangio that has a ways to go.

WTF is it with Sangio? lol

I can only speak from our own experience, but we try to let ML occur naturally in barrel. Because we barrel late (late November, first half of December) it is cold, so we usually do not have ML start until early Spring–finishing late Spring, early Summer. We do not use any SO2 until we have finished ML (except at the start of fermentation), and we have never had any problem with VA or other issues. This approach usually produces a great, round mid-palate. Last year I had two barrels finish in late July with no issues–both great barrels. This may be pushing the envelope, but I have talked to a number of winemakers in Burgundy who take a similar approach.