Who else filters the majority of their wines through a coffee filter?

WINE TALK
81

no paper filters for us

82

If I have to filter for crumbled cork I have a gold mesh coffee filter I set aside for wine due to the inert metal. It doesn’t catch the fine sediment at the end though.

83

That was a disturbing link. Hopefully, that truckers boss was Rudy K.

84

Thanks for resurrecting me, Maureen. Have you found your soulmate in life?? or on this board, at least? [feel free to elaborate]

All red wines are not the same, structurally, obviously. Neither is all sediment. Some is grapeskin left in the wine rather than fining it out. It is thought to nourish the wine incrementally as it ages. And, it is a marketing tool of some importers [I think Kermit Lynch always used that??] But, all wines are filtered in some way. Otherwise, you’d have dead bugs and other foreign bodies in the wines. So, to me, filtering is not something to be avoided, if it is employed to avoid potentially unpleasant and/or polluting taste elements.

My understanding is that as red wines age, the total tannin molecule package (I’m not a scientist and am not that fascinated by the science of tannins as they age)becomes so large, some precipitate out of the wine and form a sediment. That sediment is different from what winemakers intentionally leave in the wines. Those tannins have done their job and add nothing further to the aging process. They fall by gravity, depending on how the wine is stored. In an “aged” wine, it is impossible for a taster to distinguish between sediment that is that and the “good” sediment purposefully left in the wine by the winemaker. Another problems is that left untreated and “free” in a wine, the astringent tannin precipitate will float all over the place or be in suspension, effectively. Thus it will hit the taste buds randomly and affect the taste of the wine at any given moment, adding helter skelter astringency.

At this point the red wines I drink are almost all over 15-20 years old. The simplest solution to this issue is the “clean” the wine so it is a non-issue. (I know some people love to taste this sediment as part of the experience, but I cannot understand what those people are talking about if it is still incorporated in the wine.) Using it for jam is something I’ve never tried… [truce.gif]

Since I started collecting, etc. in 1983, I have been leery of precipitated tannins. For one thing, they can simulate a bad wine. I saw that in early visits to wineries and was educated by several winemakers. (Who use the gravity method to “clean” an older wine; they are often willing to sacrifice up to half of a bottle…why not! But, they all attempt to “clean” the wines. )The 1983 Burgundy vntage, my favorite, in its early days seemed “off” to me. It is well known that the pigments precipitated early, leaving paler wines that looked more mature than they were. I often mistook them as “off” wines for the reasons above. They were and are not. I just didn’t know how to “clean” them right for my palate. (People often thought the premature changes were evidence of “rot” , a supposedly rampant problem in 1983 reds. I have yet to find “rot” or its taste or aromas in any 1983 wine once cleaned (and I have no reason to believe they would show it, if not cleaned.

The quest, for me, and for those on this board who recognize the benefits of a “cleaned” wine (even a gravity method is “cleaning”, though IMO risky and wasteful). I have read this thread…and others…of peoples methods and concerns. They are all over the place. If it works for them, bravo. I am very skeptical that some people who post on this subject know what they’re talking about, but not all, of course.)

Since, say the late’80s, I have sought the best method of “cleaning” such wines. Since my collection is now aging and older, the issue is even more vital for me now. In this quest I have often tried the gravity method. But, it is VERY difficult to do well enough (despite what we think we can see precipitate-wise.) It can work, but for me , it is very upsetting to sacrifice up to half a bottle to avoid filtlration…and a downright silly tradeoff.) I have tried gold coffee filters (they are not fine enough to remove the fine, most probematic sediment; cheesecloth, which is even less able to “clean” a wine; “filters” several winemakers have given me to experiment, that they use as part of the winemaking process (they seemed to strip the wine; paper filters I bought in wine equipment shops in Beaune (essentially finer coffee filters); metal filters of all kinds (none I’ve used really reliably clean the wine (perhaps I have not tried hard enough to find a fine enough metal filter; perhaps it doesn’t exist; I gave up trying, as nothing did as well for me as paper coffee filters); and, paper coffee filters.

Considering my goal is to “clean” a wine as much as possible, not necessarily to “filter” a wine, per se, I have found the paper coffee filter best; and, the residue left in all of them, visual comfort that it has done something meaningful; when it doesn’t , I then put the wine in the bottle and let it settle out and use the “gravity” method, despite my aging, tremored hands. My comfort level with this method, as most efficient and most comforting for my concerns.

Is there a downside to them? Yes…there are often aromatics when smelling the used filter, though I’ve almost never found these aromatics in a wine so filtered; and, when I have they seem to blow off nicely with “substantial” aeration, which is always part of my regimen, with “substantial” being relative and variable depending on what I guess about the particular wine. I have sensed filter aromas/tastes, which others have rarely found. (WE all have our sensitivities; but, more often I have thought wines in need of “cleaning” that people have thought were spoiled, so the tradeoff is a good one–for me.

In sum, the paper coffee filter method is the best “tradeoff” to me and has long been. Some methods leave lots of sediment in the wines, defeating the purpose of “cleaning”. Others, using only gravity, risk the shaky hands of the pourer, particularly when such a bottle is passed on to other tasters, rather than decanted and the sediment reincorporates, creating, essentially different wines from different pours. At least a filter of some sort will lead to a consistent wine.

There is a downside to paper coffee filters that I described But, it has so infrequently affected the wines that it has been, for me, a good bet and a great alternative to leaving a hefty portion of an aged wine in the bottle “for the angels”. The wines I drink are not now cheap, even if they once were when purchased at the wineries decades ago during visits. I’d rather drink my investment in its entirety than discard a hefty portion (often higher than the casual naked eye view warrants)…especially if the downside is not intrusive on balance. (Even if it might be at very first or if the wine strategy (or goal) doesn’t leave time for aeration. (And the idea that an old wine can be transported to a location and then popped and poured and the “best” gotten from it, IMO, is ludicrous. People who think that ought to experiment with two such bottles: one filtered and one that isn’t. Not all wines need filtering, but trying to tell the diference between recently transported wines that need it and those that don’t is pure folly, IMO.

Any soulmates for Maureen?

I know no one here will admit to being mine and , so be it. We all know the “right” answer here…even if our answers are all over the spectrum…we’re all “right” on this issue, right? [stirthepothal.gif]

85

Has anyone looked into or searched for the very finest metal filter in a non-reactive material? I recall seeing an ultra fine stainless steel filter that was a perforated rather than mesh ? tea filter, but it is harder finding one that is narrow enough to fit into a narrower mouthed decanter or shallower funnel. Just wondering if anyone has found perhaps some professional lab metal filter that would be useful, even if not as fine as a paper filter.

86

Any research into what micron sized filter would be best at removing the fine sediment but leaving flavor-producing materials (? Colloids or whatever) in the wine?

87

Too much about filtering: 1-3 micron is a ‘polish’ filter for wine…i.e. to remove suspended sediment and make the wine clear/‘bright’. I believe most/all of these filters are made from some sort of plastic, polypropylene or something similar. Most/all polish filters are ‘nominal’, not absolute.

Absolute filtration depends on the filter’s pore size only…so a 2 micron absolute filter would have a max pore of 2 micron.

Nominal filters depend on pore size & ‘adsorption’ (i.e. ‘catching’ particles as they go through the filter…note some Nom filters don’t have an absolute component). The pore size of a 2 micron nominal filter might be 3 microns, which will get most of the particles. Adsorption/etc will get the particles smaller than 3 microns…because there aren’t any guarantees with adsorption, a 2 micron filter will get 95% (or whatever, filters specify what the % is) of all particles 2 micron or larger (unlike absolute, which will get 100%).

The advantage of nominal is it takes much much less pressure to push the wine through, compared to absolute…and high pressure pumping is a negative for wine quality. Another advantage of nominal is they can process a lot more gallons before clogging…and less time messing with the wine is always a good thing.

Typically, filtering for clarity is always done with a nominal filter. Sterile filtering (to 0.45 micron) using traditional (non-cross flow) filters is done with a couple of nominal filters (first with ~2.5m and then with 0.5m typically I believe) before putting it through an absolute 0.45 filter.

Cross flow filtration is a type of nominal filtration, so to get 0.45m absolute the cross flow is designed for 0.2micron nominal (cross flow has no absolute component).

At the consumer level, all of the research in this area is with coffee filters as far as I can tell.

I agree with Mark and Fred’s comments above that letting the bottle stand up for days/weeks, to settle out on its own, is best.

If you’re going to filter, using a bleached paper filter is the way to go imo…even the best unbleached impart a flavor. The bleaching is oxygen bleaching for nearly all filters these day, and is what you should look for. The best on the market imo is Filtropa and is worth the effort to find it on the web and order it, if you’re likely to do this. I’d pour hot water through it first (and let it dry out until it’s slightly damp), which is std practice for pour over coffee (except for the drying out part).

Also, Stumptown did an interesting comparison of paper vs cloth vs able kone filtered coffee: The Facts About Filters | Stumptown's Filter Comparison

For my palate, french press & able kone have too much sediment, which masks many of the interesting/delicate coffee flavors. Obviously lots of folks love FP/able etc, so different strokes. My favorite unfiltered coffee is vacuum pot (using the Cona glass rod), which has excellent temp control and very little sediment…but it’s a little tedious to make.

Tannins: The ‘tannins become too large and fall/precipitate out’ theory is been discredited. The theory that’s commonly accepted (last I checked): all tannins stay in solution ‘forever’ (unless they bind to something else that precipitates out, colloids for example), and over time the tannins bind/reform with each other until ultimately they become ‘medium’ sized. Large tannin are astringent, small ones are bitter, medium are the least of either. However, tannins are way more complicated than this simplistic summary (for example, except for a ‘side component’, seed tannins are smoother & less astringent than skin tannins…but it takes a bit of age, sometimes a lot, for this ‘side component’ to detach from seed tannins).

88

The Haley’s Corker is usually the extent of our filtration. We will slow pour the bottle and determine the size/quantity of sediment. The Haley’s Corker gets the big stuff in older ports and wines. We don’t worry about the small sh!t, just call it chewy wine.

89

This sounds interesting and pretty much contrary to what I’ve learned. For example, I’ve understood that the smaller the tannin compounds are the more astringent they are i.e. the more they dry your mouth. As the tannins in the wine polymerize with age, the less astringent they become; a wine that has been very grippy and mouthdrying when young might have become much less so with age. Still the ample amount of tannins can be tasted in the wine as a bitterness - at least I’ve found out that tannins are normally pretty flavorless, but they start to lend some bitterness to the wine the more tannic it is.

Furthermore, I’ve also understood that the seed tannins change a lot depending how ripe the grapes are, but quite often the seed tannins more aggressive and astringent, which is why many wine producers try to avoid extracting seed tannins almost hysterically, while still doing aggressive pumpovers and pushdowns to extract as much tannins as possible from the skins.

Am I wrong here, can you point out some reading that would prove otherwise? However, I do agree that tannins are way more complicated and can’t really be reduced to these kind of hard-and-fast rules.

90

I agree with Mark and Fred’s comments above that letting the bottle stand up for days/weeks, to settle out on its own, is best.

If you’re going to filter, using a bleached paper filter is the way to go imo…even the best unbleached impart a flavor. The bleaching is oxygen bleaching for nearly all filters these day, and is what you should look for. The best on the market imo is Filtropa and is worth the effort to find it on the web and order it, if you’re likely to do this. .

I agree with such comments re: standing wines up being the best. That’s non-controversial. But, practically speaking (which is the most important) getting such wines to the glasses without reincorpation of any sediment is the “challenge”. It is difficult enough to do when the first glass is sitting next to where the bottle was resting for days or months. When the bottle gets transported or someone tries to make a second pour from the bottle (even with a glass next to the resting place)…in my experience the “days/weeks” were wasted.

Thanks on the reco for the Filtropa. I’ve ordered some on Amazon. The “unbleached” filters do have a smell to them; the issue is what remains in the wine after using them. These, however, sound like they might obviate that risk. (Though I don’t understand their bleaching process.) I’ll report back, as I will experiment with them for sure.

91

Otto: Check out the following website/page, by Jamie Goode, which has an excellent summary of tannins. There’s a section on mouthfeel and astringency about halfway down that talks about this (note: degree of polymerization (dp3 or dp12) is a reference to the size of the tannin…dp3 being smaller than dp12). Jamie doesn’t talk about this, but it’s my understanding that the smaller tannins are more bitter…I’ve seen AWRI (Aussie wine research) info about this, but can’t find it atm unfortunately. Jamie mentions ‘galloyl esters’, which are the ‘side component’ I mentioned that are responsible for a fair amt of the astringency of seed tannins (i.e. astringency is more than just how large it is, even tho it’s a significant factor).

Stuart: I’d love to hear what you think of the Filtropa compared to what you’ve been using once you have some experience with them. I mentioned this above, but I’d pour hot water through them (and let them dry out partly or completely, either works fine) prior to using, for the most neutral results.

I agree transporting a sedimenty wine can be problematic. I’ve been successful transporting (to restaurant or where ever) in a 6 (or 12) bottle styrofoam shipper (upright style, of course). The wide base means it won’t move at all while it’s in the car. The biggest issue I’ve had is restaurant servers picking up the bottle and waving it around (prior to decanting it), even after being told about the sediment issues. Decanting off the sediment (or filtering) ahead at home is best, but some restaurants won’t allow bottles that have been opened…you do the best you can I guess.

92

Eric. Thanks for the Filtropa recc, I also ordered from Amazon. Also thanks for the wealth of fantastic info here, always great to hear from someone who’s really in the trenches on a particular issue.

93

Although I’ve read a lot of Goode’s texts, that was a new and informative piece, thank you.

However, this text didn’t clarify your claim on seed tannins being smoother and less astringent. That galloyl ester part was mentioned, but there was nothing on how those esters affect the roughness and astringency of the tannins, how it breaks apart or detaches from the tannins and whether these seed tannins are actually less astringent than skin tannins afterwards. Googling some information on galloyl esters didn’t mention anything about their effects on astringency, bitterness or perceived roughness. Do you know any source that would discuss this matter in-depth?

94

A few years back a urologist friend gave me an unused mesh device for filtering kidney stones. The mesh is extremely fine and inert.