phenolics- OK in cider?

[Nathan Shackelford]

I'm curious to hear what the members here think about phenolics in cider being listed as a flaw. I have tasted many commercial ciders (especially from the UK and France) with high tannin content that demonstrated a phenolic character, and I assumed that was true to style. In Claude's book he describes phenolics as a flavor that is related to MLF. I've seen a PubMed journal to which Andrew Lea contributed and it shows phenolics as tannins. 

Recently I submitted 2 ciders (which had some tannins from crab apples) to a competition. The judges ticked the box for phenolics, and while they said several positive things about the ciders, they couldn't break through to the "Very Good" category because of this "flaw". The BJCP judges recommended that I "watch my fermentation temperature" which is certainly appropriate advice for beer brewing (indicating that they believe the aroma comes from yeast). I fermented at 55-58 F, which is fairly cool, and appropriate for cider and the yeast I was using. 

Is this just a hold over from beer judging, or are phenolics always a bad thing in a cider? Are they just using the word "phenolic" to describe the classic band-aid, medicinal flavor that is a flaw in beer, or are they rejecting all phenolics as an acceptable flavor in cider? 

Ironically, the judges said I should "try to up the apple flavor, if possible". I had a cider that received a medal and it was the one with the most overt apple aroma and flavor. (Repeat line about wine tasting like grapes...)

I'm in the US, midwest. 

[Andrew Lea]

On 15/03/2016 16:44, Nathan Shackelford wrote:
> I'm curious to hear what the members here think about phenolics in cider
> being listed as a flaw. I have tasted many commercial ciders (especially
> from the UK and France) with high tannin content that demonstrated a
> phenolic character, and I assumed that was true to style. In Claude's
> book he describes phenolics as a flavor that is related to MLF. I've
> seen a PubMed journal to which Andrew Lea contributed and it shows
> phenolics as tannins.

You might like to check out this presentation I gave in Colorado last
year at a meeting hosted by Dick Dunn
http://cider.org.uk/phenolics_in_cider_apples.pdf

> Is this just a hold over from beer judging, or are phenolics always a
> bad thing in a cider? Are they just using the word "phenolic" to
> describe the classic band-aid, medicinal flavor that is a flaw in beer,
> or are they rejecting all phenolics as an acceptable flavor in cider?

You need to distinguish between the non-volatile native tannin /
phenolics which give desirable mouth-feel to UK and French ciders, and
their MLF breakdown products (see presentation above) which are volatile
and can give the character which you describe.

It's all a matter of balance, and style. In an Old World style cider,
both non-volatile tannin and volatile phenol aroma ("old horse") would
generally be seen as positives - but even for us there are limits, above
which the "old horse" becomes "farmyard" and objectionable. In a New
World cider, the tolerance for these aromas may be low to zero.

>
> Ironically, the judges said I should "try to up the apple flavor, if
> possible".

Here in the UK, no traditional cider should ever taste of apples. That
IS a flaw!

Andrew

--
near Oxford, UK
Wittenham Hill Cider Portal
www.cider.org.uk

[Dick Dunn]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:44:23AM -0700, Nathan Shackelford wrote:
> I'm curious to hear what the members here think about phenolics in cider

> being listed as a flaw...

Depends on what style of cider you're talking about. In what category did
you enter your ciders? More below.

>...I have tasted many commercial ciders (especially

> from the UK and France) with high tannin content that demonstrated a
> phenolic character, and I assumed that was true to style. In Claude's book
> he describes phenolics as a flavor that is related to MLF. I've seen a
> PubMed journal to which Andrew Lea contributed and it shows phenolics as
> tannins.

Yes, these characters are common in UK and French ciders. They're
deliberate. You said you entered a BJCP competition, so here's the
relevant text from the BJCP Cider Style Guidelines:
"Cider may go through a _malo-lactic_fermentation_ (MLF) which converts
some or all of the sharp malic acid to softer, less-acidic lactic acid.
...In ciders made with tannic apples, the MLF commonly produces
ethylphenols which are evident as other flavors: spicy/smoky including
smoked meat, phenolic, and farmyard/old-horse. These flavors are
desirable although not mandatory in English and French styles, but must
not be _over_the_top_..."
So if you entered your cider in the English or French categories, the
judges were definitely out of line to mark it down. If you entered in New
World it's a tougher call. The guideline there does say "Some tannin
should be present for slight to moderate astringency, but little
bitterness" but there's no mention of phenolic character, in the sense I
expect the judges meant, of band-aid or hot circuit board.

The trouble with drawing hard lines between categories is that ciders often
straddle the boundaries. The guidelines allude to how to decide in what
category you should enter one of these in-betweenish ciders. And when I
talk to judges I always try to emphasize that any good cider should fit in at
least one category, possibly more than one, but never zero. The categories
should be understood to overlap, not to have gaps between them.

> [comments on your ciders]... The BJCP judges

> recommended that I "watch my fermentation temperature" which is certainly
> appropriate advice for beer brewing (indicating that they believe the aroma

> comes from yeast)...

GAH!! Beer-brains!
One of the tendencies we fought again and again in trying to work with
BJCP material--guidelines and training both--was judges not only noting
what they consider faults, but attempting to tell the cidermaker how to
correct them. And the reason we fought it is (first and foremost) that
the judges were wrong more often than right; they were anti-helpful.

> Is this just a hold over from beer judging, or are phenolics always a bad

> thing in a cider?...

Could be a hold-over from beer judging. Depends (see next) what they mean
by phenolics. Harsh astringency and non-hop bitterness in beer are real
faults. They -can- come from a common newbie mistake.

>...Are they just using the word "phenolic" to describe the

> classic band-aid, medicinal flavor that is a flaw in beer, or are they
> rejecting all phenolics as an acceptable flavor in cider?

You'd have to ask the judges. If you have your judging forms, you'll have
contact information for the judges. While you can't expect them to
remember your particular cider(s), you -can- ask them what they mean by a
particular word or phrase.

> Ironically, the judges said I should "try to up the apple flavor, if
> possible". I had a cider that received a medal and it was the one with the
> most overt apple aroma and flavor. (Repeat line about wine tasting like
> grapes...)

Yup, and again from the BJCP guidelines, very first paragraph about aroma
and flavor:
"Ciders and perries do not necessarily present overtly fruity aromas or
flavors--in the same sense that a wine does not taste overtly of
grapes. Drier styles of cider in particular develop more complex but
less fruity characters. A simple _apple_soda_ or _wine_cooler_
character is not desirable in a cider or perry."

Writing style guidelines is difficult and full of risks that they'll be
misinterpreted.
But I've about concluded that training judges is impossible. If someone
has the aptitude and attitude to be a good competition judge, they can be
helped along with information and experience, but that's about it.
--
Dick Dunn rc...@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA

[Nathan Shackelford]

Andrew and Dick,
Thanks for your feedback. I knew I'd get some insight here.

The ciders that were noted as phenolic were New World (C1A) and French (C1C).
They were both made from dessert/wild fruit had some tannins from crabs, but no MLF character. I used low levels of sulphites post-ferment to prevent it. The phenolics listed by judges were "plastic" aroma. Personally, I wouldn't mind a little old horse funk, but these ciders didn't have it. However, I didn't pick up on any plastic aromas myself. Perhaps with the tannins in the New World entry, I should have chosen the English category?
The cider entered in the French category was naturally fermented medium sweet (1.003) by successive rackings to limit nutrients. It wasn't a high acid cider, so I didn't want to lose any tartness in MLF.

Dick, thanks for confirming my suspicion that it's possible not all BJCP judges are truly prepared to objectively judge ciders. I believe you have to drink a lot of ciders often to know what the range of possibilities are.
I'm looking forward to learning more about this in April. I'll be volunteering at GLINTCAP.

[Richard Anderson]

Phenolics can be problematic, our first ciders had a distinct and distracting rubber band flavor. I attributed it to using juvenile fruit and inexperience. We found that fining with gelatin/colloidal silica helped appreciably. Over several years the phenolics became manageable and provide a what I consider an interesting flavor profile to our bitter ciders and fining was discontinued.

[William Grote]

This is a very interesting topic to me as well, and one that Andrew and a few others have weighed in on.  I think that with dessert apple varieties, especially blends with aromatic ones like Macintosh, if fermented low and slow,  a fantastic fruit forward apple rich aroma is maintained and certain judges just assume this is Acetaldehyde and treat it as a flaw.  Well it might be in an English cider, but working with native apples this is exactly the flavor and aroma profile I was hoping to achieve.  It's like the 'essence' of an apple blossom, flower-like, apple like, but not at all like fresh pressed juice, 

My scoresheets from Glintcap came back and 5 out of 6 entries earned bronze or silver, but were noted mostly as "strong apple aroma" and most judges listed acetaldehyde in the notes.  All of my entries we dry, so there was no back sweetening to create those aromas.

Nicole Leibon described my New World Heritage entry "Strong apple aroma, faint almond, faint plastic- banana, orange, apricot, peanut - this is weird - Suspect Acetaldehyde"

I used DV10 on that batch, which is known to enhance fruit characteristics, I just wonder if the combo of topping off with pure Macintosh juice and using a yeast that accentuates the fruit esters could be a problem.

Next step is Mass Spec analysis, it's worth the price for my sanity.....

[Mike Beck]

William

I am confused…

>>>>, apple like, but not at all like fresh pressed juice,<<<< to describe what you want to achieve.

>>>>, I just wonder if the combo of topping off with pure Macintosh juice<<<< that describes process. (post ferment?)

 

If you are using Mac Juice after fermentation, that would be considered back sweetening, or I may have interpreted process incorrectly?

M. Beck

--
--
Visit our website: http://www.ciderworkshop.com
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Cider Workshop" Google Group.
By joining the Cider Workshop, you agree to abide by our principles. Please see http://www.ciderworkshop.com/resources_principles.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cider Workshop" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cider-worksho...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cider-w...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[bembel]

Hi Mike

When I taste I pull perhaps 150ml out of a 5 gallon carboy and then top off the headspace with fresh juice, whatever sugars are in the fresh juice get pounced on by the yeast that are still very much present in the cider and keep the airlocks active with fresh CO2.   Those sugars are gone a few days later. 

Back-sweetening ( or back-juicing as I have heard it referred to by a few cider makers) is only effective for changing the flavor and balance if there will be no further metabolic activity after the addition,  so anything that you do to a cider after stabilization or immediately prior to stabilization ( sterile filter, pasteurization, SO2/ Sorbate )

I'd like to think that some of the fresh apple aroma lingers due to the much slower speed of late addition top off juice fermentation, as the yeast are not in turbulent feeding frenzy mode when they metabolize it, but that may be pure unscientific speculation on my part to rationalize my efforts😀 

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Cider Workshop" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/cider-workshop/5meJWCg_EYI/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to cider-worksho...@googlegroups.com.

[Mike Beck]

Not like I would have an answer(not that smart).  I like the theory, does it matter, can you drink it? Marinade with it, bratwurst boil with it?  Lab testing is just ridiculous expensive.

M. Beck

[Matthew Moser Miller]

Hey Nathan,

I had similar questions for my submissions at GLINTCAP (also, pretty sure we met?). I'd made a cider that was largely scrumped dessert apples, but about 1/6 of the fruit used was Yarlington Mill, and I used an English cider yeast (WLP775). 2.5 month ferment, low temp, with delayed sulfite and yeast pitch to give the apiculate/wild Saccharomyces a go.  The acidity ended up fairly moderate (though there were a few Wicksons in the fruit, too), and the good year meant pretty high ABV solely from the juice.

I got similar comments on mine-- smoky, phenolic, old horse, stressed yeast?-- and marked as faults (though they also said it was a decently complex cider?). And maybe they were fault, based on parts of the New World Modern description; but because my apple blend was majority scrumped dessert fruit (and a bit of wild fruit, too), I felt like the rules said I had to enter as NWM rather than New World Heritage- let alone English.

I guess my question is: should the guidelines be concerned with/ making its demarcations based on the fruit, or on the style trying to be achieved? And what space is there for the ciders that don't fall into these narrow definitions, or that straddle several cider traditions? Should I just enter in unlimited, and be done with it?

I'd be interested if anyone has thoughts on these ideas of classification and when to follow (or ignore) the guidelines in cases like this.

[Dick Dunn]

Various notes, and I don't mean to criticize Matthew but only to provide
some suggestions...

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 09:07:34PM -0700, Matthew Moser Miller wrote:
> Hey Nathan,
>
> I had similar questions for my submissions at GLINTCAP (also, pretty sure
> we met?). I'd made a cider that was largely scrumped dessert apples, but
> about 1/6 of the fruit used was Yarlington Mill, and I used an English

> cider yeast (WLP775)...

OK, WLP 775 is an "English cider yeast" in name only. It was derived from
something they got in England, but the lab process of cleaning it up
removed the unusual yeasts and sub-characters. It's basically a white wine
yeast S.cerevisiae which works well with (usually low-nutrient) ciders.

But, with 1/6 YM, you've pushed the cider well out toward the sceptered
isles, so that informs the choice of classification.

>...2.5 month ferment, low temp, with delayed sulfite and
> yeast pitch to give the apiculate/wild Saccharomyces a go...

All good!

> I got similar comments on mine-- smoky, phenolic, old horse, stressed
> yeast?-- and marked as faults (though they also said it was a decently
> complex cider?). And maybe they were fault, based on parts of the New World
> Modern description; but because my apple blend was majority scrumped
> dessert fruit (and a bit of wild fruit, too), I felt like the rules said I
> had to enter as NWM rather than New World Heritage- let alone English.

OK, here's where we get down to it. If you had the smoky/phenolic/old
horse, you had a MLF. With the YM in the blend, you're tending to an
English cider.

There's no way you should have entered as NWM. Maybe NWH, but the
character you describe is central to English. The MLF notes -are- faults
in NWM, to be sure.

> I guess my question is: should the guidelines be concerned with/ making its

> demarcations based on the fruit, or on the style trying to be achieved?...

It's based on the style you achieve. Think this way: The judges mostly
don't know or can't tell what blend you used. What they judge on is the
character of the cider itself.
And in New World Modern, notes like phenolic and old horse are right out.
They just don't belong in the style. If you'd entered English, the judges
should be expecting those MLF notes and would judge accordingly, as to
whether they're in balance and harmony with the rest of the cider.
(Still, let us grant that newer judges have a lot of trouble with the
phenolic and old-horse characters in particular, even when judging styles
which allow/expect them.)

>...And

> what space is there for the ciders that don't fall into these narrow

> definitions, or that straddle several cider traditions?...

I preach, as often as possible (and sometimes vociferously) that any good
cider fits into at least one category. The styles are intended to overlap;
there should be no gaps. There are actually some notes in the styles to
give guidance on how to enter, although there should be more guidance.

> I'd be interested if anyone has thoughts on these ideas of classification
> and when to follow (or ignore) the guidelines in cases like this.

Well, you should follow the guidelines according to the character of your
cider, NOT its provenance. Put yourself in the judges' shoes and think
what they have to go on.

[Matthew Moser Miller]

Hi Dick,

Thanks so much for your reply. It was my first submission to a competition (though I've made cider for a few years now), and I guess I placed too much emphasis on the varieties listed in the various definitions-- treated them as required base rather than likely/possible base. I also bottle condition and have never been one for a post-ferment sulfiting, so I've probably gotten used to having some MLF flavors in my ciders-- I assume those smoky etc. flavors were increased with the inclusion of higher-tannin apples? And I had been aiming to get closer to an English-style cider; I should have trusted my instincts in terms of category rather than let the specific definition distract me.

That's really interesting about the WLP 775. I had assumed it was a yeast/bacteria culture blend (similar to Wyeast's Roselaire blend for lambics), given how important I had thought the secondary strains and non-S. cerevisiae were to the character of an English cider. Do you know of any available cider yeasts that are that sort of blend, rather than a pure culture?

Also, just wanted to say: I tasted your iCider at GLINTCAP, and it was absolutely fantastic. So glad I got the opportunity.

[Paul Ross]

Do you know of any available cider yeasts that are that sort of blend, rather than a pure culture?

You don't need to buy a yeast/bacteria blend to recreate an english cider! Everything you need is on the apples! 

I'd just let the natural fermentation happen by itself, minimal/no sulphites. If you want to add something, buy a good malolactic culture to add to make sure you get full malolactic action.

[Dick Dunn]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:27:09PM -0700, Paul Ross wrote:
[OP asked]
> *Do you know of any available cider yeasts that are that sort of blend,
> rather than a pure culture?*

> You don't need to buy a yeast/bacteria blend to recreate an english cider!
> Everything you need is on the apples!

This has been covered here before. Some of what you need is on the apples
in such small quantities you're not likely to have a lot of luck that way.
Depends on where you live I suppose. But the main source of microbes for
that "English character" is the equipment, where they build up year to
year. This means, if you can go that way, you'll build up a "house
character".

> ...If you want to add something, buy a good malolactic culture to

> add to make sure you get full malolactic action.

Also covered here in the past. A commercial malolactic culture will,
indeed, convert malic to lactic. It softens the cider, reduces the acidity
by up to half. But it won't give the ethylphenols that create the
character you want (smoky, spicy, etc).
The reason is that the commercial ML cultures are strains of Oenococcus
oeni. They just do MLF. The ethylphenols are produced in cider by some
species of Lactobacillus.

[Nathan Shackelford]

Matthew,
I think others have answered these questions well. It's always fun to meet people from web conversations in real life as well. I still need to put your name with a face, however!

I started this thread because I suspected that homebrew judges might not have a breadth of cider experience to understand how tannins and phenols might make a cider better or more complex as opposed to being a flaw. I started this thread before GLINTCAP 2016, after my ciders had been judged at BJCP events about 6 different times. The judges notes didn't jive with the depth of cider knowledge that I've seen here.

My short experience on putting your home made ciders into styles:
In my case, I made several different ciders from the same apples, but they finished up with very different characters depending on the blend and the processes I used. In the end, I submitted 3 ciders in different categories to my local homebrew competition. I literally tasted them while reading the style descriptors. They were all made from dessert fruit, but that wasn't the only flavor factor. One was entered as New World (it had some tannins and was spontaneously fermented) it was balanced and off-dry no MLF, another finished semi-sweet, also spontaneous ferment, and had undergone MLF and fit the French category descriptors well enough, while the final one had a very small amount of pears in it, so it qualified for the Specialty category, it was sulfited and fermented naturally, but it had a very appley aroma. In the end the judges gave that one a bronze medal because (I think) it was closest to the grocery store style of cider. It was interesting because if I mentioned that the cider was fermented with wild yeast, the judges commented that they wanted more wild yeast character... which made me think they had a specific flavor profile in their head for wild yeast, but we all know that it's a worldwide variable that you can't control and it probably has more to do with other flora than the yeast itself (as well as how much S02 you are using). At GLINTCAP I submitted a clean fruit/acid forward cider to be judged as New World-Modern and it also scored bronze. I was happy with the feedback, knowing that they had a clue. They didn't recommend I change yeast, fermentation temp, sanitation, or anything silly like that.

When it comes to GLINTCAP, the judging is clearly cider-centric and the sensory training session proves it. I'm convinced that it is the most worthwhile place to submit ciders to get feedback. The judges really do judge according to the style it is submitted in. I was stewarding a table where a lovely commercial cider (one of the best in the flight?) didn't score as well because it just didn't fit the style category it was being judged in. The judges were crestfallen that they had to judge it against the "wrong" category descriptors.

As Dick said, it's good to read the descriptors, and figure out which one best describes your cider. For me, it helped to learn to taste the things described, so you can place your cider in the right category.

[Matthew Moser Miller]

Nathan,

If I came across as criticizing or disagreeing with the judges for GLINTCAP, that wasn't at all what I meant. I found the feedback (and the whole experience there as a steward) hugely valuable.

I guess I had more trouble interpreting the descriptors/style guidelines, which seemed to place a pretty high emphasis on ingredients ("NWM is a cider made primarily from culinary/table apples," "MWH cider is made primarily from multi-use or cider-specific bittersweet/bittersharp apples") and less emphasis on the flavor of the final product (NWM mentions higher acid, but that's about it; the NWH specifies no MLF character, but doesn't define that). Chalk it up to my being a novice in GLINTCAP submission. But I do feel like it'd be helpful for the competition if it were made explicit the flavors that were sought for styles and that the ingredients/processes were less important than the sensory assessment of the cider.

(And it's probably worth saying that it seemed that other categories like English and Spanish ciders were much clearer on their flavor profiles, without much or any discussion of the specific apple varieties expected. Maybe it's chiefly a matter for the New World categories.)

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le jeudi 12 mai 2016 19:09:35 UTC-4, Matthew Moser Miller a écrit :

I guess I had more trouble interpreting the descriptors/style guidelines, which seemed to place a pretty high emphasis on ingredients ("NWM is a cider made primarily from culinary/table apples," "MWH cider is made primarily from multi-use or cider-specific bittersweet/bittersharp apples") and less emphasis on the flavor of the final product (NWM mentions higher acid, but that's about it; the NWH specifies no MLF character, but doesn't define that). Chalk it up to my being a novice in GLINTCAP submission. But I do feel like it'd be helpful for the competition if it were made explicit the flavors that were sought for styles and that the ingredients/processes were less important than the sensory assessment of the cider.

Interpretation of style categories for entry submission can certainly be a bit tricky, although I think it has been greatly improved with the recent introduction of the New World Heritage style.
Here is the way I understand it... Dick might correct me if I am wrong on this.
All New World styles should be "clean taste" - meaning that lactic, barnyard, horsy, cheesy notes will be considered as faults. Difference between Modern and Heritage then is mostly on the blend, with more tannin-rich apples in the Heritage style. The trick there is to use sulfite to prevent MLF and the appearance of these notes.
For Old World styles, i.e. French, English and Spanish, it is expected that there will be some of these funky notes that come from lactic acid bacteria and wild yeast. Hence for these styles you may use processes like keeving, wild yeast fermentation and wild MLF, with no or very little sulfite - all of which will contribute to some complexity and some of these funky notes.
Difference between French, English and Spanish is mostly on blend and on acid-tannin-sugar balance:
French ciders are more bitter, and have lower acidity; these normally should have quite a bit of residual sugar to balance the bitterness, i.e medium or sweet.
Spanich ciders are more acidic, with some VA, and have less tannin, and also quite dry.
English ciders have somewhat less tannin than French, but usually more astringent than bitter, combined with a bit more acidity, and with residual sugar varying from dry to sweet.

There is still a grey zone in my opinion... A cider that has a mostly New World style blend, i.e. eating North American varieties with maybe a bit of tannin-rich apples (crabs, Harrison, or Banane amere for example, making it Heritage style blend), hence that would be quite rich in acid and some tannin. If such a cider blend is keeved and fermented without sulfites and if you let wild MLF happen, it will develop funky notes. This sort of cider is the hardest to position.
It doesn't fit in New World Heritage because of the funky notes although it has the correct type of blend.
The process might be very close to French cider process, and you might get similar aromas and notes, but the blend if off for French style - too much acid and not enough bitterness. I don't think it fits that class.
You could try the English style or the Spanish if there is some VA. But most likely you won't have enough astringency to really fit with the English style, and the Spanish classic taste is really difficult to get.
So you are stuck with a cider which might be very good, but doesn't really fit well in any class. I do think it may happen even if Dick might disagree...
Claude

[Dick Dunn]

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 04:09:35PM -0700, Matthew Moser Miller wrote:
...
> I guess I had more trouble interpreting the descriptors/style guidelines, which seemed to place a pretty high emphasis on ingredients...

The style guidelines on the GLINTCAP web site are based on BJCP styles, but
they're sort of a summary and lack the prefatory material (which is in the
BJCP cider style guidelines) to motivate them. See
http://www.bjcp.org/docs/2015_Guidelines_Cider.pdf
There you'll find a significant description of MLF under "Aroma and Flavor".
You'd also find, under "Ingredients" that
"The apple and pear varieties are intended to illustrate commonly used
examples, not dictate requirements when making the style."

Note that the Heritage-Modern distinction is not present in the BJCP
styles (although I think it's time that it should be). I was party to some
of the discussions of the split, so I'm going out on a limb a bit here, but
I'd say people talked around how to describe the distinction and came up
with several approaches. It seemed to be a case of "we know it when we see
(taste) it, but..." not knowing how to define it. However, it was easy to
get some agreement if somebody named a particular commercial cider, as to
whether it was NWM or NWH.

Matthew continued...
>...("NWM is a cider made primarily from culinary/table apples," "MWH cider is made primarily from multi-use or cider-specific bittersweet/bittersharp apples") and less emphasis on the flavor of the final product (NWM mentions higher acid, but that's about it; the NWH specifies no MLF character, but doesn't define that). Chalk it up to my being a novice in GLINTCAP submission. But I do feel like it'd be helpful for the competition if it were made explicit the flavors that were sought for styles and that the ingredients/processes were less important than the sensory assessment of the cider.

It IS the case that the sensory assessment is key to the judging, since in
most cases that's all the judges have to go on.

What is it that motivates new styles, or splitting a style? Well...the
purpose of the styles in competition is to allow judging ciders fairly,
by not having seriously dissimilar ciders in one judging flight. And what
had become clear with the old single New World style is that cidermakers
were heading in two different directions. Depending on the judges, one or
the other of those directions got short shrift.

> (And it's probably worth saying that it seemed that other categories like English and Spanish ciders were much clearer on their flavor profiles, without much or any discussion of the specific apple varieties expected. Maybe it's chiefly a matter for the New World categories.)

There's years more experience with those styles.

[Matthew Moser Miller]

Hi Dick,

It's really helpful to see the updated BJCP guidelines, especially the line that "The apple and pear varieties are intended to illustrate commonly used
    examples, not dictate requirements when making the style." At the moment, there's no mention of the BJCP guidelines on the GLINTCAP "style guidelines" section; perhaps in the future it would be helpful to link to those (if that's what the judging will be based on) or to at least include that important line about the varieties not dictating requirements.

And I didn't mean to suggest that I somehow disagreed with the splitting of the style into several categories- that seems like an excellent idea, given the sheer variety of approaches being taken.

And Claude, thanks for your reply- I'm learning how difficult it may be to categorize ciders, particularly as more people start making cider for themselves or the market. I wonder: how would people classify the ciders coming out of places like Aaron Burr in NY or Millstone Cellars in MD? I haven't been able to get ahold of any Aaron Burr, but the Millstone ciders I've had were highly acidic and very funky- definitely MLF and likely a little acetification as well. 100% barrel-ferment and no sulfites- what would we term that process, if not heritage New World?

 (Again, that's not a criticism of the standards/guidelines for judging; more a matter of "Where the hell would you suggest putting it?".)

[Claude Jolicoeur]

Le jeudi 19 mai 2016 13:50:53 UTC-4, Matthew Moser Miller a écrit :

And Claude, thanks for your reply- I'm learning how difficult it may be to categorize ciders, particularly as more people start making cider for themselves or the market. I wonder: how would people classify the ciders coming out of places like Aaron Burr in NY or Millstone Cellars in MD? I haven't been able to get ahold of any Aaron Burr, but the Millstone ciders I've had were highly acidic and very funky- definitely MLF and likely a little acetification as well. 100% barrel-ferment and no sulfites- what would we term that process, if not heritage New World?

Yes! I think that falls exactly in the grey zone I was describing in my previous post...

To get away with it, in my opinion, either the "New World Heritage" class should should be enlarged as to include funky ciders, or a new class, like "New World Funky", should be created... (now we'd have to work on the name)
Dick, I'd be curious to have your opinion on this.
Claude

[Dick Dunn]

Thanks, Claude. I think if there is enough "funky" character, the cider
should be entered as Old World, either English or French depending on other
notes in the character. The up-front decision then is whether the cider is
more sweet and fruity, "fruit-forward", in which case enter it as French,
or more "austere" in which case enter it as English.

But there are cautions: If the cider is acetic (and note distinction
between acidic and acetic!!!) then it's got a problem; it's off. If it is
just acidic, you've got a challenge as to how to enter it and I don't have
a good answer. BUT it's unusual to have a cider which is at once all of
(a) sound, (b) quite acidic, and (c) "funky"...because the funky characters
go with lower-acidity ciders (and spoilage situations). I couldn't say
much more without actual tasting.