FINALLY Making Great Cider - Stuff I Wish I'd Known 4 Years Ago

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

oljimmy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2013
Messages
344
Reaction score
63
Location
Providence
Hey everyone,

Been cracking open the bottles from an awesome, tasty, and popular batch of cider and I thought I'd share what I've learned over a 4-year process of experimentation, learning, and talking to craft producers large and small. Many of you know this stuff already but I just wanted to record it for the interested, and I understand that you may disagree with me.

1. Orchard juice.... we all know this is ideal. But for $15 you can get a kit that will help you test the malic acid content before you buy it. Any juice above 6.5 g/l is just not worth the risk, IMHO. That level of acid will very likely dominate the end flavor, no matter what you do. Malo-Lactic Fermentation is unpredictable and not a reliable method of acidity-reduction unless you know your system/environment delivers it.

2. With all due respect to the great sticky on this forum, yeast might not be as important as you think it is. I've varied yeasts, from Nottingham to Montrachet D47 to 71b, and to be honest the differences are (in my opinion) very minor compared to the things I'm listing here. Apple sugars are fully fermentable, so choosing an ale yeast usually doesn't really give you much of a sweeter final product, and "flocculation" is irrelevant since you'll be doing a long, clarifying secondary anyway (#5). If I had to put numbers on this, I'd say that with cider, 70% of the quality is in the initial juice, 25% is in your process, 5% is in the yeast. Choose a proven cider-yeast, but don't stress about it. [Edit: OK, maybe 10%, I might be persuaded that yeast selection can make a difference in attenuation.]

3. Forget yeast nutrients. Cider-makers all over the world highly prize orchards which deliver low-nutrient juice, because it is much easier to 'naturally' produce a cider in the 1.002-1.008 range: the yeast just run out of nitrogen, starve, and stop eating sugar. Adding DAP/fermaid just ensures that your cider will almost certainly run bone dry. Put another way: if your cider has stopped fermenting at 1.008, it is not "stuck", it's "great cider"!

4. Slow fermentation as you move through the 1.020-1.000 range. The best way to ensure this is to cold-crash and rack to secondary at 1.020, keeping temps in the 50-60F range if possible. This requires that you keep an eye on fermentation: when the real vigorous activity has died down, you're probably in the 1.020s or low 30s, and you should begin regular gravity-testing.

5. Four months in secondary, minimum, preferably 6-8, 10 if you're patient. There's a reason zero craft producers skip this step. Deciding to forego a long secondary is just deciding to make lower-quality cider.

6. If (as is very likely) your cider finishes below your target sweetness, home cider makers should backsweeten with Orchard-juice, not AJ concentrate or Stevia, then either (a) stove-top pasteurize or (b) get all the cider into a fridge to halt the fermentation. For moderate carbonation, add a little extra juice and wait 'till it's carbonated before pasteurizing/refrigerating. Adding K-Meta/Sorbate to neutralize the yeast here doesn't always work and has (in one of my test batches) produced serious off-flavors. Stove-top pasteurization does not, according to a blind-test I did with three tasters, perceptibly alter the flavor.

Add pectinase to the orchard juice before sweetening to eliminate unwanted haze/cloudiness. Juice concentrate is vastly inferior as a sweetener, real juice is just awesome by comparison. I wasted a couple of batches before I realized that AJC was producing the off-flavors.

If you manage to do these things, I'm 98% sure you'll end up with a smooth, full-bodied, apple-y cider that stacks up to what most craft producers are making.
 
Great tips, thanks!

One question: when you say to secondary for x number of months, do you rack to a different container periodically or just leave it?

What yeast do you like to use?
 
Thanks for the great information, I never worried about malic acid, but now I'll start testing for that.
I have to disagree about yeast selection though, I did a series of tests from September-December 2014 specifically testing certain apple varieties juice with WL 775 english dry cider yeast, and WL 002 english Ale yeast. I also tested with Nottingham dry yeast but discontinued that after getting some sulphur aromas and flavors. I also did wild yeast tests with much variation in the results. Everyone has different taste thresholds, but I could easily taste a different flavor profile from the WL002 compared to the cider yeast. The cider yeast always fermented completely dry, while the WL002 did not, stopping anywhere from 1.008 to 1.004. Starting gravities were in the 1.050-1.060 range, depending on the apples I was using. White Labs website lists the 002 as having "medium" alcohol tolerance, while the 775 had "medium high" alcohol tolerance. I think the alcohol concentration makes the 002 stop fermenting at 1.008-1.004 which then leaves a little residual sweetness and apple flavor.
I'm planning on testing different yeasts next fall, not sure which ones to try next.
I agree with your comments about minum aging. While acceptable cider can be had in 4 months, its way better at 6 months or a year.
Thanks again for the great cider post.
 
You didnt even mention tannins yet, have you gotten to that stage yet? WVMJ
 
Kingo: I just leave it. Why would you rack several times? I've rotated between Nottingham and D47 for the last couple of batches and I like them both... though again, compared to your aging/backsweetening/pasteurization method, the yeast choice is comparatively insignificant. 71B, S-04 and Montrachet also seem pretty good, and lots of people swear by EC-1118 (though I find it a little aggressive).

Madscientist: I should have made an exception for wild yeast, they definitely produce a different (and unpredictable) set of flavors. And I accept that some have found an attenuation difference. I have had ale yeasts go to 0.995, so I refuse to let yeast choice have anything to do with my FG target. Anyway, I've edited the post... there is definitely room to disagree on this one. My main point is that beer-brewers often come to cider-making thinking that the yeast selection is crucial, whereas IMHO it isn't nearly as crucial as other factors.

WVMJ: the only noticably tannic cider I've made was from a mixture of true cider apples purchased from Farnum Hill's orchard and pressed myself. Many producers have told me that you simply cannot replicate real apple tannins with wine-tannin powder, which by the way is often made from chestnuts. My own experience bears this out: a batch of identical juice/yeast with 1 tsp/gal added tannin is almost indistinguishable from a batch with no added tannin. I think that it may add a slight kick at the very end of the taste, more of a scent than a taste, but that's it. The message on tannins is the same as the original post: the juice is all-important here, and there is a reason that each fall so many North American producers desperately hunt around for true cider apples: one trained as a chemist informed me, in no uncertain terms, that the idea of making nicely tannic cider from non-tannic apples is "a pipe-dream".
 
Thanks for the great information, I never worried about malic acid, but now I'll start testing for that.
I have to disagree about yeast selection though, I did a series of tests from September-December 2014 specifically testing certain apple varieties juice with WL 775 english dry cider yeast, and WL 002 english Ale yeast. I also tested with Nottingham dry yeast but discontinued that after getting some sulphur aromas and flavors. I also did wild yeast tests with much variation in the results. Everyone has different taste thresholds, but I could easily taste a different flavor profile from the WL002 compared to the cider yeast. The cider yeast always fermented completely dry, while the WL002 did not, stopping anywhere from 1.008 to 1.004. Starting gravities were in the 1.050-1.060 range, depending on the apples I was using. White Labs website lists the 002 as having "medium" alcohol tolerance, while the 775 had "medium high" alcohol tolerance. I think the alcohol concentration makes the 002 stop fermenting at 1.008-1.004 which then leaves a little residual sweetness and apple flavor.
I'm planning on testing different yeasts next fall, not sure which ones to try next.
I agree with your comments about minum aging. While acceptable cider can be had in 4 months, its way better at 6 months or a year.
Thanks again for the great cider post.

I will second the use of wlp002 for a sweeter cider. I've tried several different yeasts (some wine, some champagne, a few ale) and keep coming back to 002. I think it may be personal preference, but my wife and I like the wlp002 vs the others. Then again, we're not a fan of wines, so my ciders made with those yeasts had wine like profiles. I would agree that the quality of juice is a big deal, as well as controlled fermentation Temps and not using DAP.

Great post! I love the insight. I've been looking to improve my ciders for the last few years.
 
Oljimmy, IMO, there is a great deal of truth and useful thought in your post but keeving cider (removing or controlling the nutrient level to produce a specific level of sweetness or quantity of alcohol is a skill and an art that requires more work than simply refusing to ensure that the yeast have enough "nutrients". Failure to provide sufficient nutrients can result in off flavors and the production of mercaptans that can make your cider undrinkable and may indeed result in a stalled fermentation.
In my opinion, the quality of the apple juice is 90 percent of the cider. The choice of yeast is perhaps 1 percent and patience and technique (including temperature) are the other 9 percent.
 
A lot of great advice here..
"Forget yeast nutrients." Ferment dry and backsweeten has always been my path.. I'll have to try that.

AND to "back sweeten with orange juice," I would never had thunk.. why, what's the advantage?

"Four months in secondary, minimum, preferably 6-8, 10 if you're patient." I've never been accused as being patient.. but I'm gonna try...really..maybe. I usually bottle after about two months but you rack at 1.02 and leave in the secondary? Not bottle?

.. and was that orange juice concentrate or the real stuff?
 
Yeah you talked about Orchard Juice, never heard cider called that before but its appropriate, but not about what kind of Orchard Juice went into making it a better juice like using some real cider bitter fruit, even tossing in a few crab apples with a lot of tannins helps. Its great you can get your hands on some Farnum Hill apples, a lot of cider on here is made from just regular apple juice which can make a pleasant enough hard cider but its not like from real cider apples from the old style apple trees here in the states or the euro apples. Planting a few Harrison apples this year to see if we can up our own hard cider quality. WVMJ
 
oljimmy - thanks for your information! I know that I have heard of the low-nutrient apples being superior, and in Jolicoeur's book there is a discussion of bottle carbing cider with residual sugars in nutrient-poor juice by adding a certain amount of nutrient to continue limited fermentation. It's a really tiny amount of nutrient, however, so that could be a bit of an adventure if too much is added.
bhbldon - I think that oljimmy means apple juice from the Orchard (as opposed to bottled or concentrate.)
I started a couple of bottled apple juice ciders, just to get the process figured out. Not too impressed but I think they will be drinkable when done. This is just to hold me over until we get some real apples. Brand new orchard - four apple trees in the ground and nine more on the way this spring (seven apple and two pears.) It will be a while before we have our own! But we are looking forward to it.
 
Hey bernardsmith: I wasn't suggesting keeving, I've never done that. Basically, almost all apple juice obtained at any ordinary orchard is going to have a ton of nutrient in it, more than enough to ensure fermentation. It is extremely uncommon for ordinary juice to "Stick" at higher than 1.020, as all cider-makers know, we have the opposite problem. My suggestion is that we not make things worse by adding nutrient, though you're right that a nutrient deficiency might cause off-flavors.

Hey WVMJ, I think you can make a good cider from all kinds of apples (unless they're crazy acidic like Granny Smiths tend to be), but if you're looking for that English/French tannin, it's got to come from the juice, IMHO. Harrisons should be interesting, never tried 'em, good luck!
 
Update: a batch of mine fermented with the powerful wine yeast D47 has stopped at 1.011 due to multiple rackings, while a recent batch using Nottingham went to 0.999. More evidence that process matters more than yeast selection, at least as far as FG is concerned...
 
I can definitely get behind the no yeast nutrient advice. I DID add it to my cider once when i thought i had a slow or stuck ferm.... WOW. Fermented down to .99 and the batch was just OK. had a an almost ethery taste that wasnt overwhelming but definately wasnt my best batch. Since i have started stopping around 1.007-10. However, i only secondary for 2-4 weeks and my cider comes out amazing. I am honestly curious what would happen now if i left it longer!
 
3. Forget yeast nutrients. Cider-makers all over the world highly prize orchards which deliver low-nutrient juice, because it is much easier to 'naturally' produce a cider in the 1.002-1.008 range: the yeast just run out of nitrogen, starve, and stop eating sugar. Adding DAP/fermaid just ensures that your cider will almost certainly run bone dry. Put another way: if your cider has stopped fermenting at 1.008, it is not "stuck", it's "great cider"!

Hmmm... any time I didn't add nutrient to cider it stank up the place with the farts. Could a cider that smells that bad actually taste good?
 
Hmmm... any time I didn't add nutrient to cider it stank up the place with the farts. Could a cider that smells that bad actually taste good?

Absolutely. The best batch I have right now smelled like eggs for weeks. Really stressed yeast can produce off-flavors, but sulfury aromas nearly always age out. With WLP 775 Cider yeast, you're actually supposed to *count* on a sulfury aroma for 1-2 months after pitching. This will only be a problem if you do what you shouldn't be doing, which is drink it after 4 weeks.
 
I too am of the school of let it age. I accidentally let some of my original hard ciders get 6 plus months of age, and they were really nice to drink. To me, young cider doesn't taste like cider much at all, but if let to age the apple-y ness will come back. I am talking a 5-6% hard cider, not the high ABV% type. If you want to try making applejack (and trust me, you do), I suggest making a cider of at least 10% ABV to start with, as 10% of 1 gallon is 12.8 oz of pure alcohol. You won't ever get the alcohol out all by itself, so you will get a pint or so of some very nice "schnapps", and for less than $5.00, that is a really good deal. I too have tried different yeasts, and have settled on Pasteur Red wine yeast, Not Pasteur Champagne yeast. It is very temperature tolerant, and to me anyway, the flavor of the fruit hasn't been stripped during fermentation.
 
I saw cider on sale at a local Walmart this past January for $1.50 a gallon. I'm upset with myself for not buying a big load of it. I would love to have made a cider-mead hybrid sort of concoction.
 
Good advise.
You say you slow down the fermentation at 1.020. Have you tried just slowing down the entire process. I wonder how much of a difference it makes. I ferment mine for a day or so at room temp and then take to my basement for the remainder of its life (6 mo minimum). I agree with going slow and my simple-is-better approach just keeps the whole batch at lower temps to ferment.
I am fortunate enough to have an orchard that grows some cider specific apples (Champlain Orchards in VT) and feel that makes a nice difference.
 
6. If (as is very likely) your cider finishes below your target sweetness, home cider makers should backsweeten with Orchard-juice, not AJ concentrate or Stevia, then either (a) stove-top pasteurize or (b) get all the cider into a fridge to halt the fermentation. For moderate carbonation, add a little extra juice and wait 'till it's carbonated before pasteurizing/refrigerating. Adding K-Meta/Sorbate to neutralize the yeast here doesn't always work and has (in one of my test batches) produced serious off-flavors. Stove-top pasteurization does not, according to a blind-test I did with three tasters, perceptibly alter the flavor.

Add pectinase to the orchard juice before sweetening to eliminate unwanted haze/cloudiness. Juice concentrate is vastly inferior as a sweetener, real juice is just awesome by comparison. I wasted a couple of batches before I realized that AJC was producing the off-flavors.

If you manage to do these things, I'm 98% sure you'll end up with a smooth, full-bodied, apple-y cider that stacks up to what most craft producers are making.


What? i gotta disagree here. I use DAP and i ferment to 1.014 and then i filter the cider and back sweeten with AJC and brown sugar. Force carb to about 3.2 volumes in keg then bottle.

NO off flavors and it tastes great. everyone loves it. more people want that than the beers i make. the AJC gives it a more apple flavor IMO. reg apple juice aint gonna cut it for me.
 
If you've got access to a filtration system to halt fermentation, then yeast nutrients are obviously fine, since they won't cause the cider to rush into the 0.999 range. I didn't say DAP would cause off-flavors.

If you're genuinely looking for apple flavor, you want squeezed apples. If you want processed apple sugars from low-quality trees in China, you can use AJC (That's almost always what it is), and if you just want a brown, malty sweetness you add brown sugar. Use whichever combination you like. I should have mentioned that my post was directed at people who want the end product to taste a bit like the beginning product (apple juice).
 
I agree about the yeast. It is much more important to get good juice from well ripened apples - let em hang on the tree till they get really ripe! You can't make good cider from supermarket juice-from-chinese-concentrate just by fiddling with the yeast. Get good juice and ferment in a good airtight container full to the brim and you can't go wrong.

I like fully dry cider but it has to have gone through MLF, that malic acid is just too sour. I live in a warm climate so MLF is easy for me, more difficult if you have cold long winters.
 
I produced an excellent batch from a 2-apple juice blend (sweet and tart apples) using Safale S-04 and cold, slow fermentation at ~55F increasing to ~65f near the end. Fermented for approximately 3 weeks without nutrients, ending somewhere around 1.004. Aged for another 2 months in bottles with priming sugar. Might have added some acid blend, I can't remember for certain. Somewhere around 5.5% alcohol, so nowhere near the alcohol tolerance of this yeast, but still not over-attenuated.

An English or similarly flavorful yeast will enhance the fruit flavors of the cider. A clean yeast (S-05 or Cal Ale) will make for a more bland, crisp cider in my experience.

The cold fermentation reduces the loss of flavor compounds with CO2 emitted and helps natural flocculation. The yeast will also be less stressed than if they were growing at a maximum, high-temperature rate when nutrient limitation would lead to yeast stress. Gleaned this method from the cider episode of Brew Strong on the Brewing Network.
 
In my case I quite like a dry cider (final SG around 1.000) and never backsweeten. Am I still better off without nutrient or will leaving it out just contribute off flavors?
 
Great post!

I think the debate about whether the juice, yeast, or process has more impact on final flavor really comes down to whether or not you have dialed in your juice source and process. Now that you have those worked out, I expect you'll notice more difference between the various yeasts.

I make 8 keg batches at at time, all with same juice and process. The yeast makes a big difference. I just did a small tasting with some friends last weekend. A dozen bottles, mostly from just two juice pressings and all came out very different - especially the ones from last season that had aged a bit.

OTOH - if you you put these all up against stuff I was making 20 years ago, you would say yeah these 12 are kinda similar whereas that other stuff tastes like apple wash - which it basically was. About 10 years ago I got turned on to ale yeast which can give you better results from marginal juice, but it wasnt until about 8 years ago, when I found my current juice source that my ciders got decent enough that they were good for anything besides cheap party fuel.

The tip on testing for malic acid is a good one. I've had a few pressings that fermented out with a MA bite, and yeah even though you could taste the effects of different yeast in all of them, the MA dominated. And you are right that you cant always rely on MLF happening naturally. It almost always works for me, but I've had to add maple to a few batches to take the MA edge off them

I'm with you on low nutrient juice. The orchard that I get my juice from doesnt use any fertilizer on the trees once they start to produce and it has a huge impace on how easy the juice is to manage and stop at higher gravities. They have also been making their own commercial hard cider for the past couple years (Old Hill Cider - it is awesome), so they are also getting more particular about the #2's that they are buying from other growers, and that benefits everybody. If the juice is low nutrient, you just need to go low and slow with it and it wont create any off flavors

IMHO - you dont need a lot of tannin if you are going for a semi-dry to semi-sweet cider, because the residual apple sugars can provide the body and mouthfeel. If you go fully dry, then tannins are more important.
 
Really stressed yeast can produce off-flavors, but sulfury aromas nearly always age out.

Great information! Question: when you "age out" to remove the sulphur smell, is it already bottled or in an air-locked carboy? Just trying to understand how to get rid of the farts!

Thanks!

Brendan
 
It's in a carboy, yeah. I'm no chemist so I don't know if the sulfur is released or if it breaks down somehow. But to be on the safe side I'm assuming it's released and that it needs somewhere to go. Really, though, I've never had sulfury smells go past 2 months, and if you're trying to turn cider around in less than two months, you're already asking for trouble. So this is why I don't think this is a serious concern.
 
hi Jimmy, this post has been really helpful to me. i am planning a huge cider project this month, 200 gallons (i have only made 18 gallons before) and this thread has really helped me focus on what is important. thinking about your percentage breakdown for a while, i think i have to agree with you, but i also think that those percentages are a little bit deceiving. consider this: anyone who *really* cares about making good cider is probably going to get good juice. even as a rookie, i am picking my own apples and having them pressed. so that takes care of 70% of the project. according to your calculations, those 20 and 10 percentages (for process and yeast, respectively) now represent 66% and 33%. so of the variable parts, the yeast then actually has a lot of importance.

now consider the fact that the process is largely dictated by recipes and rules and such. sure, there are some options, but most of the "process" is a series of do's and don't's that remain fairly constant. especially if you've done your research. yeast selection is really the main factor that both has a huge affect on the result, and remains (partially) subjective. so, of course people are going to obsess over it! it's a little living magic powder.
 
When folks say yeasts don't make a difference, is it because you've done side-by-sides taste tests and concluded no diff, or because you've tasted each independently and found them all very good?

After 3 seasons using 3 different yeasts per season, my wife and I are in agreement that yeasts do make a difference. That said... it was a few weeks ago when we did a blind side-by-side taste test of our 2014 ciders, and we absolutely tasted differences in each (!), and we concluded 2 stood head and shoulders above the 3rd (!), and we convinced ourselves that yeastie #3 wasn't worth doing again. As I type, we're sipping on ole' looser #3, and saying WOW, it's darn good. It makes me puzzle the science of tasting, and the merit of absolute vs. relative impressions.

Heading into season four, I'm staying with the top two 2014 yeasts (Pasteur Red, S-04), ditching the 2014 last place yeast (Premier Cuvee), and trying two new yeasts (Notty, Cote des Blancs).

--SiletzSpey
 
When folks say yeasts don't make a difference, is it because you've done side-by-sides taste tests and concluded no diff, or because you've tasted each independently and found them all very good?

After 3 seasons using 3 different yeasts per season, my wife and I are in agreement that yeasts do make a difference. That said... it was a few weeks ago when we did a blind side-by-side taste test of our 2014 ciders, and we absolutely tasted differences in each (!), and we concluded 2 stood head and shoulders above the 3rd (!), and we convinced ourselves that yeastie #3 wasn't worth doing again. As I type, we're sipping on ole' looser #3, and saying WOW, it's darn good. It makes me puzzle the science of tasting, and the merit of absolute vs. relative impressions.

Heading into season four, I'm staying with the top two 2014 yeasts (Pasteur Red, S-04), ditching the 2014 last place yeast (Premier Cuvee), and trying two new yeasts (Notty, Cote des Blancs).

--SiletzSpey

What are the characteristics of each cider? I'm curious to find out.

I just started a five gallon batch last week and used Nottingham ale yeast. With your information I'm wondering if there is a yeast out there that I will like better.
 
Good info on here. I tend to like my ciders dry and I think they're quite good with the proper age, but I'm interested in the tannins bit. I'm not an experienced cider maker, so is there a way to get actual apple tannins into a small batch (I normally do 3g with my cider) without having a press? Assuming starting with quality juice, good processes, and proper aging, of course. Thanks folks! :mug:
 
If it hasn't been posted here yet, here is an AHA report on a yeast trial for hard ciders. This report is why I use wlp002 for all my ciders.
 
Took a sample after a week in the primary. It was down to 1.010 and I did not like the taste of the sample, it tasted like my weisenbier that didn't turn out all that good. Hopefully 2 more weeks will clean it up.
 
Hey great stuff, I have a question, I ve had a batch goin since approx 7-1-15. Nottingham yeast, two weeks fermented, back sweetened with cider, bottled kept at about 75 F since then. I've tried a couple every now and then, they are heavily fermented, which I like actually, but they are very yeasty. Coming back from vacation drinking the occasional angry orchard, when I left I was thinking that mine would stand up, but when I got back they were hardly drinkable after having the commercial stuff. Will mine lose these yeasties over time?
 
Hey great stuff, I have a question, I ve had a batch goin since approx 7-1-15. Nottingham yeast, two weeks fermented, back sweetened with cider, bottled kept at about 75 F since then. I've tried a couple every now and then, they are heavily fermented, which I like actually, but they are very yeasty. Coming back from vacation drinking the occasional angry orchard, when I left I was thinking that mine would stand up, but when I got back they were hardly drinkable after having the commercial stuff. Will mine lose these yeasties over time?

No, not if they are already bottled. The yeasty flavor might come from tons of yeast now in the bottom of the bottle. If you have a lot of yeast in suspension, then it might be from that, and it might get better once the yeast falls out to the bottom of the bottle, and is poured from off of that without disturbing the sediment. Nottingham yeast is usually really good at falling out, though, so I think the first scenario (where there is just a ton of yeast in the bottle) is most likely.
 
When folks say yeasts don't make a difference, is it because you've done side-by-sides taste tests and concluded no diff, or because you've tasted each independently and found them all very good?

--SiletzSpey

Yes. I just concluded a five-yeast test using juice I pressed from Cortlands. Lavlin D47, Montrachet, Premier Cuvee, E-1118 and a spontaneous Wild ferment. Each yeast, unsurprisingly, took the juice down to around 0.995, and the resulting ciders were indistinguishable (i.e. each was equally gross). There may have been subtle differences had I used S-04 or Nottingham, but I wanted to test the wine yeasts.

For me, anyway, this confirms my point: when you're using substandard juice (Cortlands, and from a heavily fertilized, nitrogen-rich orchard) the yeast factor drops out. The juice is far and away the most important factor in determining resulting cider quality.
 
Let me run this by y'all (lol)since everyone here seems to know something .
Just a guy with 20 apple trees and looking for good uses.

6 gal apple cider -added camden tablets-waited 30hrs
moved to carboy and added lalvin ec-1118 yeast, 3 tsp yeast energizer
OG-1032@72 put away for 24 days then racked-SG reading 1002
no-lol should it have a taste ?

:confused:
 
Back
Top