Spirits aging with a magnetic stirrer?

[der wo]

I do an aging experiment with my magnetic stirring plate just right now.
Very turbulent stirring in a sealed jar of an already one year old rye whiskey.

The whiskey was aged with sticks in a jar with pinholes. It has lost within the year about 20% of the volume angels share.

I bottled 2x 200ml 43% in two identical 500ml-bottles. In one of them I dropped a ptfe coated stirring fish.

After 6 hours stirring and 30min waiting I did the first tasting.
I recognized positive differences:
More vanilla and perhaps sweetness. Less raisins flavor. Less tails. The character more like long aged I think.

I am really surprised. I didn't believe it would help. At least not with some already aged whiskey. And why more vanilla?
It was obvious. But it wasn't a blind test. Next test after more hours stirring will be blind. If it fails I will never make again not blind tests I think...
If it doesn't fail, I will wait a week and test blind again. Because perhaps it's only a temporary effect.

[brat]

Interesting, What kind of stir bar do you use? And was the jar open or closed? The reason I ask about the stir bar is because I wonder if the coating is safe with higher ABV alcohol. But this is pretty cool I'll be interested in hearing more about your results.

[der wo]

The bottle is closed of course. With an open bottle you would loose much volatile components. This would change much the taste of course. But for this experiment I want to exclude evaporation. Not because I want to prove that we don't need evaporation for aging. But I want to experiment, if there is a different fast aging without evaporation too.
The stirrer is a magnet coated with ptfe. And ptfe is rated safe here. Here more about my magnetic stirrer:
http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... 39&t=64157

[Danespirit]

Very interesting experiment, der Wo.
During the winter period, I had so many other things to do, I didn't get time for finishing my magnetic stirrer...did buy some PTFE stir bars, though.
My original thought with it was to stir some yeast, but now your experiment gave me a new idea.
I would assume, the agitating of the liquid would cause the more volatile components to evaporate faster...hence the more mellow taste.

[der wo]

Thanks,
I think because the lid is closed I will not have any significant evaporation.

[SaltyStaves]

I would like to combine this with my tests with adding fresh air to the distillate.

I made an oak stopper and have a snorkel of 316 stainless steel seamless tube which goes to the bottom of the distillate.

All fresh air enters straight into the distillate and old air leaves via the oak stopper.
The only thing I'm not sure of, is with a stir plate, the vortex might create a significant sucking/drawing of fresh air into the distillate and lead to over-oxidation in a very short period.

I've also been experimenting with an aquarium pump, but I can't get anywhere near as much turbulence as your stir bar without significant volume loss.

[der wo]

If you direct fresh air into the bottle, you will get evaporation, because the "old air" leaving the bottle will not only be air. And then if you taste a difference, probably it is mainly because of evaporation, not because of oxidation.

[SaltyStaves]

I believe its both, but you are correct. Its mainly evaporation.
As its only passive, the oak stopper keeps it sustainable, but with forced air/agitation, it would be difficult to keep in check.

[der wo]

Next tasting after total 19h stirring and then 2h waiting, blind testing:

Now the surprise: I could not detect much difference. I guessed the right one but probably I just had luck. But I had a salty and then very sweet meal before. So I decided to test the next day again. But again, I couldn't taste a difference.
But why did it work at the first time?
- Either because the first test wasn't a blind test. I didn't expect much. So I don't think, this convinced me to taste an improvement. Perhaps the first sniff had something, what routed me on the "yes there is something" -track. And then I was convinced already. Even with blind tests it's always a problem, that the first one you pick has a stronger taste and flavor than the second one, when the taste buds are already a bit numb.
- Or because I did the stirring directly after diluting both bottles to drinking strength. And the stirring only helped a bit to fasten the smoothing of the "dilution shock", if there is something like this. We know, that many distilleries dilute very slow. We have also threads about this on hd. I think for example googe is a believer and wrote much about this. And at the first and third tasting also the unstirred bottle was smoothed already perhaps.
Honestly I think the first explanation is more credible. Probably it was my fault.

Next question is, why did it fail?
- Either because it simply doesn't work this way.
- Or because the Whiskey was already aged with much air contact.

The next experiments I see:
- The same experiment with something fresh from the still or with something which is perhaps one year old too, but is not aged with air contact. This would be interesting for my Geists and Brandies without oak and angels share. But for my Whiskies, which need time for the oak anyway, it was useless.
- Again two equal bottles of the Rye Whiskey. In one of them I add some hydrogen peroxide, in the other one the same amount water. Perhaps stirring the one with the peroxide a bit.

[cuginosgrizzo]

Thank you der wo, it is always interesting and educative reading about your test/research!

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

[skow69]

Peroxide, eh? To promote oxidation? Interesting idea. Have you tried this before? And the hydrogen just floats away, right? Have you figured out the dosage?

[der wo]

I thought H²O² + whateverwantstogetoxidized -> H²O + whateverisnowoxidized

I just started a new thread about:
http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... 83&t=66586