Home Distiller

Snuffy-ga wrote:Just a note, after reading a fair portion of this thread and considering the pro's and cons, what is wrong with just gently heating the stuff on an electric stove in an open pan and monitoring the temp carefully? I mean we can easily bring it to 155 degrees F and hold it for a period of time to reduce the bad stuff. seems to me it would accomplish much the same thing. Or did I miss something?

I think a few people have already done something similar using a water bath (as in canning) or setting the jars in a crock pot with water around the jars. As well as I can remember, it seemed to work - just took a little longer. That said, I think there is an added benefit to using the microwave oven. There are vibrations at the molecular level that you probably won't get with the other techniques.

Thats how I did it, snuffy. Worked well

the best thing about this forum is you get so many different opinions and we can use what works for us.

Flavouring with heat works but the result is not identical to ageing. Distress ageing is not really ageing it is rapid flavouring, nothing wrong with that but it is what it is

AAAAhhhh Crow stuff it in your hat.... Do you even own a microwave? and have you tried this method...

Hate to tell ya it does work it may not be 20 years in a barrel ... but .... I probably don't have 20 years left...

happy stillin, and nukin

FS

thecroweater wrote:Flavouring with heat works but the result is not identical to ageing. Distress ageing is not really ageing it is rapid flavouring, nothing wrong with that but it is what it is

I have yet to see anyone who can define what ageing even means. Slow evaporation of heads accross semipermeable wood and slow oxidation of ellagitannins from oak seem to be the defining features. There is no reason why these processes can't be sped up.

You gotta remember that nuking also heats up the wood and what's in it. A slow heat can do this, but will take longer and you will lose a lot from evaporation. Probably more so than nuking. Slow heat, you are heating up your likker which in turn heats up the oak. Nuking does it all at once.

="fullysilenced"] AAAAhhhh Crow stuff it in your hat.... Do you even own a microwave? and have you tried this method...
Hate to tell ya it does work it may not be 20 years in a barrel ... but .... I probably don't have 20 years left...

Yeah bud I have one and have tried a few different ways to distress "age" those methods work well to flavour and most likely evaporate some unwanted compounds but it ain't ageing, wish it was but it ain't. There are a mirrored of reasons why its not the same, some volatiles wanted will be removed with the "unwanted' compounds and most of the said "unwanted compounds are actually needed but in a reduced or oxidised ratio. Distress ageing is not in my honest opinion true ageing but a combo of amelioration and flavouring not equal to that which takes place over time in carefully selected oak barrels.

Bagasso wrote:

thecroweater wrote:Flavouring with heat works but the result is not identical to ageing. Distress ageing is not really ageing it is rapid flavouring, nothing wrong with that but it is what it is

I have yet to see anyone who can define what ageing even means. Slow evaporation of heads accross semipermeable wood and slow oxidation of ellagitannins from oak seem to be the defining features. There is no reason why these processes can't be sped up.

As stated ageing is a process of storing a libation in a semi porous vessel for a given period of time. as time goes by a head space is created known as ullage this slowly increases this spirits exposure to air that causes different reactions with the assorted compounds in the spirit. along with the slow process of smaller molecule volatiles leaching out at a rate faster than larger molecule volatiles (angels share) . Ageing in short is defined by the past tense term ullage

Ullage: natural process of evaporation creates ullage in the barrel by causing some of the alcohol and water particles to escape as vapors - a loss sometimes referred to as the "angel's share". If the wine is in a container that is not completely air-tight, these vapor molecules (along with carbon dioxide) will diffuse out of the container through openings in the wood and around the bung and be replaced with oxygen molecules. While some oxygen is beneficial in the maturation and break-down of some phenolic compounds such as tannin

Aging is just what the word implies... A period of time... Back in the day all they had for storage was wooden barrels so that was what spirits were stored in... The people of the day had no clue what was happening in those barrels... I'd venture to guess that charring the barrels had more to do with cleaning them up for continued use and then at some point someone figured out that the spirits ended up coming out of the charred barrels tasting smoother than from raw barrels... The practice caught on and here we are still using the same method today... And even though we now know that something is happening, and can control the outcome by varying the char, portions of the entire aging process still remain a mystery... Leaving a little magic in the process isn't necessarily a bad thing...

thecroweater wrote:Ageing in short is defined by the past tense term ullage

None of what you posted indicates that the process can't be sped up.

Bagasso wrote:

thecroweater wrote:Ageing in short is defined by the past tense term ullage

None of what you posted indicates that the process can't be sped up.

maybe it can be, what i was doing was giving a definition of what ageing is

thecroweater wrote:

Bagasso wrote:

thecroweater wrote:Ageing in short is defined by the past tense term ullage

None of what you posted indicates that the process can't be sped up.

maybe it can be, what i was doing was giving a definition of what ageing is

Let's be honest, it isn't just about symantics and dictionary definitions. I've seen you post in other threads calling these techniques BS yet there is nothing that says that they are not achieving the same changes in the liquour as sitting and waiting.

"Wouldn't it be nice if we were older
Then we wouldn't have to wait so long
And wouldn't it be nice to live together
In the kind of world where we belong"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZBKFoeDKJo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

guess it depends which side of 50 you're on.... whether or not you want to hurry time along

Not interested in symantics or arguing the toss, never said this method doesn't work in fact in this very thread any several others i have stated that it very likely does work. You wanted a definition of ageing and thats what you got

thecroweater wrote:Not interested in symantics or arguing the toss, never said this method doesn't work in fact in this very thread any several others i have stated that it very likely does work. You wanted a definition of ageing and thats what you got

But you say that it isn't ageing although, if they work and you say that you think they can, then they are arriving at the same end product, then in your own words "it is what it is" and that would be the same as ageing.

Saying they are BS because it isn't "ageing" as defined is playing symantics.

if you think you will get the same result as can be obtained by ullage good luck, it has been my experience that no type of distress ageing that replicates ageing that is not to say it doesn't result in a nice drink. Ok for one the compounds in oak vary in the rate they they are soluble in an ethanol solution so some will dissolve faster than others meaning short term accelerated aging will have a different ratio of compounds than those aged over a long period. Better? well that is subjective but either way if the spirit is not ullage produced its not "aged" and that is not symantics, that's just a fact

OK TIME OUT EVERYONE!!! Crow is a friend I was mainly jabbing at him... knowing he is a barrel man...

Let's reset this conversation and move FORWARD...

FS

thecroweater wrote:if you think you will get the same result as can be obtained by ullage good luck

So now we are back to you saying that they don't do the same thing that ageing does. That is how I understood it from the start.

No two barrels are the same and the liquids stored in them are also different so your going to have different compound ratios anyway.

It is symantics because all the aged stuff can be different from each other and you might not be able to tell the forced aged stuff from the ullaged stuff. The only thing they share is the label you want to place on them.

You even chimed in on the lost spirits thread with the same accustation of BS. At least they had lab results. Not saying I fully believe them but they put together a more convincing argument than "I don't know what happens but I know it isn't the same".

FullySilenced wrote:OK TIME OUT EVERYONE!!!

I was going after the ball not the player.

The reason aging takes so long in a barrel simply is because the wood is cut with the grain and it takes longer for transpiration to occur going through the pores side ways. Barrel staves have to be cut length ways, all lumber is cut length ways. Take a kiln dried white oak board and cut it across the grain a quarter inch thick then cut them short enough to fit in jars then roast and charr them and put them in 110-125 proof clear spirits then set the jars somewhere the temperature fluctuates at least 40f-50f daily and within 3-4 days there will be a significant color and flavor change and with a week to two weeks the whiskey will have the same characteristics as two year old aged spirits. This is the only rapid aging method I can find that sufficently gives the same results as barrel aging. Time and Oaks Whiskey Elements work in the same way and they do work. It will make whiskey much better in as little as 24 hours and will fully age in 2-3 weeks. The alcohol can travel trough the pores faster when the wood is cut against the grain because it exposes a lot more of the pores then the fluctuation of temperature causes the spirits to be absorbed then pushed out of the wood. Same thing that occurs in barrel aging just a lot faster. There are some distilleries that use this method. I fully aged a bottle of brandy in a week and its better than any store bought brandy ive ever had. Nuking ruins food so it has to damage the whiskey in some way also. Anyone that doesnt believe in my method, try it. You will not believe what takes places in such little time.

One important point to keep in mind - we do this to make a spirit for our own consumption. If I can get something out of a process that satisfies my own taste, then that's on me and no one else.

Think about this - whiskey in a barrel started out of practical necessity (a means of storage). The evolution of the barrel being made primarily of oak is most likely because it was recognized as the most suitable available wood to reliably contain the whiskey without leaking. The whiskey becoming better having been stored in the oak barrel was probably a secondary benefit. That secondary benefit is probably the only reason the oak barrel is still in use. The big commercial distilleries could probably give two shits about tradition. If there's a way to get something similar without oak barrels, you can bet your ass they'll use it (e.g., the 20 years in 6 days thread).

I'm a hobbyist. If I can produce something that suits my taste without emptying my wallet, I'll be the first to try it. Nuking and then aging in glass for a few months works for me and that's all that matters. I won't be missing what I might get from a barrel, because I'll probably never own one. Telling everyone they need an oak barrel to properly make decent whiskey is like saying, if you don't run it through a flute, it won't be any good. Innovation is a good thing - roll with it.

S-Cackalacky wrote:The big commercial distilleries could probably give two shits about tradition. If there's a way to get something similar without oak barrels, you can bet your ass they'll use it (e.g., the 20 years in 6 days thread).

Another thing to remember is that if a distillery comes up with something but keeps it secret then every other major player will push to discredit or downplay the process. Heck it happens here and we are not even in competition with each other.

Nuking and then aging in glass for a few months works for me and that's all that matters. I won't be missing what I might get from a barrel, because I'll probably never own one.

I'm not a fan of oak so I just nuke to smooth things out. Thought I'd point this out because half of the barrel aging process is the "angel's share" and at the moment I have no need for the other half so I have nothing to gain from a barrel.

Thinking of trying a batch with no heads cut to see if nuking will selectively remove ethyl acetate. Sure would be nice to be able to keep more of the high proof etho at the start of a run.

Bagasso wrote:

S-Cackalacky wrote:The big commercial distilleries could probably give two shits about tradition. If there's a way to get something similar without oak barrels, you can bet your ass they'll use it (e.g., the 20 years in 6 days thread).

Another thing to remember is that if a distillery comes up with something but keeps it secret then every other major player will push to discredit or downplay the process. Heck it happens here and we are not even in competition with each other.

Nuking and then aging in glass for a few months works for me and that's all that matters. I won't be missing what I might get from a barrel, because I'll probably never own one.

I'm not a fan of oak so I just nuke to smooth things out. Thought I'd point this out because half of the barrel aging process is the "angel's share" and at the moment I have no need for the other half so I have nothing to gain from a barrel.

Thinking of trying a batch with no heads cut to see if nuking will selectively remove ethyl acetate. Sure would be nice to be able to keep more of the high proof etho at the start of a run.

Anything I keep white, I treat it the same as oaking, but without the oak. It goes three cycles in the microwave, including at least 3 hours in the freezer, then combined in a 1 gallon pickle jar for at least a couple of months with periods of shaking and airing along the way.

About your heads idea - I think I would experiment a little at first before committing a whole batch to that process. Maybe treat the heads separately and blend some of it in on a smaller scale to figure out if it's something you really want to do. Might work - might not, but I wouldn't want to screw up an entire batch to find out. Please let us know how it turns out if you decide to go ahead with it.

I've nuked heads and it just made them better- it was still heads. A mildly headsy jar cleaned up pretty well, it was drinkable. Haven't noticed much effect on white tails flavor.
Nuking whiskey or rum with wood, letting it sit a month and putting it in a barrel makes for some really nice flavor.

S-Cackalacky wrote:About your heads idea - I think I would experiment a little at first before committing a whole batch to that process.

I actually meant a batch to be nuked, 1L jar in my case but, it's all relative because a wash for me at the moment is limited to 16L so even a full batch wouldn't that much more.

Croweater wrote " Distress ageing is not in my honest opinion true ageing but a combo of amelioration and flavouring not equal to that which takes place over time in carefully selected oak barrels." That's a lot of big words for me. I'm looking for consistency and drink-ability more than anything else. Heck some of those around me here in rural GA would drink straight heads and swear it was the best they have ever had.

Call a chook a duck don't make it quack but all said and done we're all chasing a drink we enjoy

Soo tell me a NEW RECIPE you've nuked lately

Or something that's turned out really nice.

Fully, I've more or less been using your method as an adjunct to aging. I also include a few hours in the freezer after it comes back to room temp and then back to room temp again after the freezer before releasing the vacuum. Most recently I've changed things up yet again. I do the microwave session on power setting 2 for 15 minutes. This longer, lower session gives me the same 150 dF temp as when I run it on power settin 9 for 3 minutes. After a session in the microwave, I wrap the jar(s) in a towel and place them in a Styrofoam cooler for a long slow return to room temp and then a session in the freezer as before. I've only done this revised method twice, and both times I only needed one microwave cycle to get it to a dark mahogany color and rich oak smell. I strain the spirits off the wood to continue aging in glass pickle jars for at least a few months. I'm using toasted and lightly charred 3/4" X 5" white oak sticks. The nuking and then aging off the wood in the pickle jars seems to give me a good consistent and repeatable result. To age without a barrel, it seems to be the best way I've found to control the amount of oak flavor infused into the spirits. I haven't done the slow cool down method enough yet to know if there's any great advantage to it.

Anyway, I use the method and I am experimenting with it further to try to refine it to my own liking.

Edit: BTW - just began aging a new recipe - my CB&BM (Cornbread and Buttermilk) whiskey.

Just added JD chips to a quart from a stripping run. Came across this thread and decided to give it a go. I charred and toasted equal quantities of chips, added a 1/2 cup of blended chips ( left equal part chips untouched as well) to a quart of 30% 6 row 70% corn. Nuked it for 1:15 and let cool to room temp. Will let sit over night and try once or twice more. Definitely notice positive change with each session. Tomorrow I will be able to decide if it compares to long term aging.

Well the verdict is in, 4 cycles in the microwave/ freezer and this jar seems like it has been aging on spirals for 6 months. This is a beautiful thing, rear end was puckered up the whole time, but now that I have some well aged whisky I think I can relax and have a sip.