hist-brewing: Re: oxidation and mead

GREATFERM at aol.com GREATFERM at aol.com
Wed Jun 12 13:39:10 PDT 1996

In a message dated 96-06-12 10:25:53 EDT, you write:

>I also noticed in Mike and Laura Angotti's post (the "long" one) that perry
>from "wild" pears kept longer (even 3-4 years), while perry from sweet
>husbanded pears only kept 5 months or so.  This is interesting, because it
>suggests that maybe higher alcohol wasn't necessarily always indicative of
>a beverage's keeping quality.  There was probably a taste component which
>existed in the wild pears but not the sweet ones, and which aided keeping.
And I loved that "long" post, that kind of sharing is what makes the net

I can give you a couple of good winemaking reasons why wild pearry might keep
better than tamed. Pears can have a lot of tannin, and wild ones would
probably be smaller, with more skin area per pound, therefore more tannic,
and tannin helps preserve wine by retarding oxidation. Secondly, wild pears
would probably have more acid and less sugar, and acid is more important in
wine longevity than even alcohol. It makes sense. 

I am proposing Pearry to reconcile the differences in spelling.


To unsubscribe from this list, send email to majordomo at pbm.com containing
the words "unsubscribe hist-brewing". To contact a human about problems, send
mail to owner-hist-brewing at pbm.com

More information about the hist-brewing mailing list