Mavrik’s second generation Eclipse personal wine treatment systems are so simple to use, you probably can do it yourself. Highly reliable, and extremely productive, they deliver wine processing for the masses. Making it easier than ever to keep your costs down while maintaining complete control over your winemaking.
Background
For 12 years we have rented smaller machines for VA, Smoke, and more. Over that time we’ve learned that the tiny rental machines don’t get much done. By the time you get it set up and working, it is time to take it back, or watch the fees keep racking up. We have solved this problem:
Much higher capacity (see below) so you get results fast
Tough components field-tested in our service machines
Longer rental periods at a lower cost
Concierge services such as delivery and recharging (VA resins)
Flows from 40 to 160 gallons of permeate per hour for treatment of real wine lots
Optional equipment operator on-site
These state of the art machines have been developed and tested in our mobile services for 15+ years.
Email info@mavrikna.com for pricing and scheduling.
In June, Mavrik is delivering the first 5 machines with it's second generation control system. This first control system change in 15 years extends Mavrik’s mission of innovation in filtration and wine treatment from membrane innovation to electronics and programming.
“Increasingly, the industry wants to own its own filters and treatment systems and not only rely only on our extensive mobile services,” said Robert Kreisher, Director of Research and Development. “So we have extended our commitment to innovating to include developing controls that are more intelligent as well as robust and user friendly.”
Mavrik has accomplished this by replacing it's static logic controller with an intelligent controller which incorporates algorithmic decision making. This reduces the amount of components controlling the machine by 60% which increases reliability, usability and scalability. The modular design makes it easier to repair and also to customize to meet end users needs.
The new generation of controls pair well with the value-added processes Mavrik has created over the years, a few of which include:
- Low pressure VA reduction
- Alcohol adjustment without heat or pressure
- Effective and final smoke taint removal
- brett/dekkera metabolite removal without oak degradation
“In nearly 20 years of filtration and mobile service, I’ve never seen a more user-friendly control system,” said Edward Barcenas, Technical Director. “It is ideal for companies who want to control their own destiny.”
"He was the same guy that came to our winery last year, and at least once sometime before that."
One of our customers asked me the other day how we manage to keep good people. We had just concluded a multi-pronged service for this customer. VA reduction, Pyrazine reduction, and UF concentration mixed and matched over many lots. Every year they have us help perfect their wines right before bottling. Business has been good for them, and they did this batch earlier than ever, because they have to get them in the bottle and out to distributors and customers ASAP.
He was impressed that he has gotten the same employee providing our services the last few years. This is partly coincidence of our schedule that he has gotten the same guy. But it is partly by design, that we retain high performing team members.
So, how do we maintain high performance in this tight labor market?
It starts with treating people right. Like most of our customers we are too small for polished "employee wellness" programs and we don't have ping pong tables or a bowling team.
What we do have is a family atmosphere. We really want our employees to succeed and feel appreciated. Different employees want different things. Take classes? Bring their dog to work? New challenges? Advancement? Time off? Just be appreciated? Everybody is different, so we just get to know them and let them know us. Then we talk openly about what they want. They stay, improve, and dedicate. It is a small industry, so eventually word gets around that it is a good place to work.
This is how we keep the same high performers around. In fact, sometimes, top performers seek us out. We get contacted by people who have worked with filters and mobile service at a high level. Sometimes we hire them if they are a good fit.
I explained all of this to the customer I mentioned above. He just smiled. So did I.
Throughout our development, we have tested synthetic resins for the adsorption step in our process. Each time we have rejected this in favor of a custom blend of organic adsorbents that are never recharged with harsh chemicals. This avoids the off flavors--plastic, solvent or papery--that inevitably come from these types of resins.
Because of this, they adsorb a little bit of CO2. A hallmark of our process is that the wine's fruity aromas are "revealed". A few of our winemaker customers have noted that they need to sparge with a little CO2 to get the full "fruit explosion" effect.
We have only been offering our complete and final smoke taint removal for a few months. We can barely keep up with the demand by existing and new customers alike.
So far we have been seeing a wave of very relieved customers who are shocked at how we can improve their wine for so little time and money.
In Oregon this sentiment has been especially strong. Our clients are grateful that they have not had to resort to more invasive processes. Speaking of "non-invasive" smoke taint removal, although ours is the least invasive process for removing smoke taint, we've learned something. There is one means of eliminating smoke taint that is even less invasive.
Down here in California the levels of smoke taint are more variable than up North (for 2020). On a few occasions, we have advised clients with very low levels of smoke taint first to try fining with products we recommend (but don't make a penny off of), without our selective treatment first. And we have been glad we did, because we made a few of them very happy when they learned that this solved their problem.
We have always made a point of advising customers on the best approach--even when it means something other than our services. This is why, for example, we have never offered TCA removal--a better and cheaper alternative already exists.
Click here to learn more, or get answers to questions like these:
Why do "free" and "bound" not matter with smoke taint?
What fining agent should I try for low level taint?
Do I need any smoke taint analysis in order to get the taint removed?
How do I get rid of my wine's smoke taint permanently and completely?
How can I get rid of smoke taint w/o any collateral damage?
One of our crews in Oregon staying at a super cool vintage camper "hotel".
http://www.mavrikna.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=67
A quick, complete, and permanent solution to smoke taint
Since I first saw bushfires in Australia in the early 2000s, I've been working personally on a solution which is quick, complete, and permanent with no collateral impact on the wine. My R&D team at Mavrik has perfected that.
You are probably thinking about smoke taint all wrong
As the list of compounds analyzed for expands, one thing remains clear: nobody knows what compounds actually impart the flavors, aromas, and mouthfeel. In addition, different fires cause widely varying smoky characteristics--but with little to no correlation to the mix of volatile phenols on resulting analyses. This hasn’t stopped speculation over the years about what matters, but, fortunately, a handful of recent research at the very least should put an end to speculation.
The earliest analyses conveniently chose analytes for which testing procedures already existed. Fortunately, those correlate quite well with perceived smoky character. Unfortunately, these are merely markers, and not the actual cause(s) of smoky aromas and flavors. Each and every one of the metabolites are also derived through oak contact. Obviously, aging wine on oak does not result in smoke taint-like flavors. Clearly there are one or more unknown things that actually influence smoky flavors, aroma, and mouthfeel.
So a bunch of new compounds were later added to analyses. Yet, those are still derived from oak (and/or from microbes such as Brettanomyces and Dekkera). Are those the cause of smoky aromas and flavors? Disappointingly, no.
Kennison et al (see endnotes) determined that the sensory threshold for these analytes in wine range primarily from 50 to 500 ppb--way beyond the levels caused by smoke. Only the ortho and meta forms of cresol have lower thresholds (13-19ppb) which are occasionally crossed by smoke tainted wine.
An early theory was “synergy” among these components “caused” smoke taint. But if so, toasted barrels tainted with Brett would give us smoke tainted wines. In reality “synergy” was just a shrug of the shoulders.
But we like to measure things and know things. So then even more things were added to lab analyses--“bound precursors” of the already tested for oak-derived volatile phenols were added to the panels. But these were just a miniscule amount of the same oak-derived compounds, bound to disaccharides. The hypothesis was that these tiny amounts (in dry wine) of bound precursors will continue to be released, through acid hydrolysis, over time. Or by an enzyme (amylase) in saliva.
So, bound precursors cause smoke taint to return?
No.
Ristic et al. (see endnotes) demonstrated that, as was long suspected, during bottle aging, smoke tainted wines release a little bit of the glycosidically bound volatile phenols and that the smoky flavors and aromas of the wine worsened. However, during bottle aging, the control wines--not exposed to smoke--also released the same (and same amount of) volatile phenols previously bound to disaccharides just like the smoke tainted wines did. Nonetheless, the controls did not develop smoky aromas or flavors. The worsening smoke flavors and aromas observed in the smoke tainted wines was caused by a decline in fruity flavors and aromas during bottle aging, not acid hydrolysis of glycosidically bound precursors.
Still not convinced?
Szeto et al. (see endnotes) used misters in the fruit zone during smoke exposure. This resulted in a significant reduction in the volatile phenols in the subsequent wine. This was in comparison to wine made from grapes exposed to the same smoke, but without fruit zone misting. However, the sensory evaluation of the two wines were indistinguishable. Reducing the grapes’ uptake of volatile phenols (the ones that are tested for in smoke taint panels) did not reduce smoky flavors and aromas.
But could amylase in saliva break down the glycoside bonds and release those flavors in the mouth? Amylase breaks starches down into disaccharides. The disaccharides for bound volatile phenols are rutinose and gentiobiose. However, amylase does not break down disaccharides nor free them from their aglycones. Aglycones are what the volatile phenols are called when bound to a disaccharide. Even if there were starch in wine, salivary amylase only breaks down about 30% of the starch ingested. And, finally, salivary amylase is de-activated by an acidic pH like that found in wine. So, no.
And then there is the peculiar case of Syrah.
Non-smoke exposed Syrah grapes have (glycosidically bound) levels of these volatile phenols equal to, or often greater, than those that show in smoke tainted wines. The same is true for wine made from these grapes, including the forms bound to the scant remaining disaccharides in dry wine. And, although Syrah descriptors sometimes include things like “flinty” and “bacon” they never taste remotely like smoke-tainted wines.
The urge to know and thus control smoke taint has led some over the years to hypothesize that things like guaiacol and, subsequently, cresols or syringol, and/or their glycosylated forms might be responsible for smoky flavors and aromas. But, alas, this has been proven not to remotely be the case.
The takeaway from this is that the markers are only markers--no matter how many you test for. They are not the cause of smoke flavors and aromas. Their analysis is not useful, beyond confirming that a) the grapes have indeed taken up smoke flavors and b) giving a general idea of how much of those flavors and aromas were taken up. Although volatile phenols may (or may not) play a small role in smoky aromas and flavors, they are, at best, minor players. The major player(s) remain unknown. Detailed analyses of nearly a dozen analytes, and their bound “precursors” is fruitless. It tells you nothing about the nature of the problem nor how to deal with it, that you do not learn from a simple analysis of guaiacol and 4-methylguaiacol.
You are going to have to rely on your palate when it comes to smoke. Lab analyses do not lead directly to a resolution like they do with other things, like VA for example.
As a final thought, consider this. Our targeted membrane separation and smoky flavor/aroma removal results in a dramatic change. One of the early clients of the new approach remarked: “There is a dramatic improvement on the finish of this wine. Once all that junk was removed, the finish became fruity again. I’m very pleased." Yet, when you run a smoke taint panel after treatment, the analytes show little change. And this is a good thing--you pay good money for oak to impart those things to the wine. The last thing you want is some indiscriminate process removing those expensive flavors and more. You want us to remove the smoky flavors, but not the desirable ones.
Selective or Permissive Membranes: How to get rid of it?
It is a simple choice: allow only smoke taint to be removed, which is slow but effective OR allow desirable flavors to be removed at the same time as smoke flavors, which is fast and effective.
Across the three decades we have offered smoke taint removal, each time we have tested permissive membranes we have been confronted with a grim reality: although they remove smoky flavors and aromas a little faster, they rapidly strip a lot of desirable things out of the wine too. Things like oak flavors and aromas, fruity esters, even tannin and anthocyanins in some iterations.
So, Selective Membranes, and Then What?
Using selective membranes quickly reveals the wine's native fruit. Just after that, the smoky flavors and aromas disappear. But then selective membranes run into a time issue: It takes a while to eliminate the harsh mouthfeel once and for all.
So, is this last step worth it? If you want your solution to be complete and permanent, it used to be your only option. But that is no longer the only option. Non-traditional fining agents have created a shortcut to solving the palate issues.
Non-traditional fining
Traditional fining agents—things like animal proteins, synthetic polymers, clays and carbons—are all linear and non-discriminating. By linear, I mean the more you add of them, the more flavors they will remove from your wine. Non-discriminating simply means that it removes a wide spectrum of things—including desirable things—from wine. You are familiar with this.
Non-traditional fining is not linear—it has a limit, beyond which adding more doesn't do much. It can also have narrower affinities. Some non-traditional fining agents don't even seem to have much effect on wines which are not smoke tainted. We have identified two which work really well to finish off the mouthfeel once and for all—without removing important wine flavors that traditional fining agents remove. These are very effective when used after our membrane treatment. If used before our membrane treatment, they will typically not show dramatic results.
What are the alternatives?
Aside from permissive and selective membranes, what are the other options?
Some people have claimed success with fining and adjuncts on very low levels of smoke taint without too much negative impact on flavors and aromas.
An alternative commercial approach involves vacuum stripping the wine's aromas off and then subjecting the entire wine to an indiscriminate adsorption media before reintroducing the aromas back to the wine.
Similarly, there is an approach of pumping whole wine directly through indiscriminate polymeric fining agents (“resins” that are made of plastics like PVPP and PET).
These two broad spectrum approaches, in addition to being very damaging to wine are very expensive as well. The alternatives amount to some form of a scorched earth approach (pardon the metaphor).
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the process require high pressures like other RO based processes?
No. All of Mavrik's processes are low pressure—well below the point at which volatile esters degrade. In most cases that is 40-60% lower than alternatives.
Can I trial it?
Sure. We are currently doing small lot trials as small as one barrel. We can process smaller vessels so long as the opening is large enough--contact us for details.
How much does it cost?
Treatment costs vary by lot volume, lot quantity, and level of taint. Most wines will cost between 40 and 80 cents per gallon to treat with our selective membranes.
What will I get for my money?
The equivalent of 2-4 passes of your wine through our selective membranes. This will remove the smoky aromas and flavors and reveal the wine’s fruit. Fining with non-traditional fining agents may subsequently be necessary to remove the last elements of smoke mouthfeel.
When does smoke taint show up?
It can be tasted at various stages. But around 6 weeks post-ML flavors and analytes stabilize.
What should I test for?
We can gauge the need for processing off of the two simple markers guaiacol and 4-methyl-guaiacol. Nothing else is informative for the remediation process. Testing after treatment is also uninformative, because the markers are derived from oak as well as smoke, and even occur naturally in wine. We purposefully avoid removing oak related flavors.
Do I need a test after treatment to tell me whether it worked or not?
No. You just need your palate. The markers being tested for are NOT smoke taint. Analysis afterwards will only tell you if a more permissive or invasive process did as much damage to desirable flavors/aromas as your palate tells you it did.
What about bound precursors?
There is no benefit from testing for these things. See endnote.
What about enzyme treatments?
Lab analysis for smoke taint markers before and after treatment with various enzymes show no change to free or bound markers. There is no benefit from their use. Even if they did release glycosidically bound precursors, they will not cause smoke flavors and aromas. See footnote.
What about oak?
No problem! Just tell us what kind of oak exposure (barrel, stave, chip, new/used/neutral) and how long before the analyzed samples were taken. We can approximate the influence of oak and separate that from your analysis. And then we will leave your hard earned oak influence alone while removing the smoke taint.
When should I treat my wine?
The ideal time to treat your wine is as late as is practical. Ideally, you do it after un-barreling and before making blending decisions. But if you need to do so earlier, there is no real detriment. The ideal time to get analysis is 6 weeks after ML and before barreling down. Remember to keep detailed records of oak contact.
Should I be worried about the smoke taint returning?
Not if you follow these guidelines. The membrane process followed by non-traditional fining removes the smoky flavors and aromas as well as any remaining colloids capable of holding smoke flavors and aromas. This will allow a natural aging trajectory for your wine.
ENDNOTES
Kennison, K.L., Wilkinson, K.L., Williams, H.G., Smith J.H., & Gibberd, M.R. Smoke Derived Taint in Wine: Effect of Post Harvest Smoke Exposure of Grapes on the Chemical Composition and Sensory Characteristics of Wine. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55, 10897-10901.
Established a definitive range of sensory thresholds for a full spectrum of smoke taint markers.
Ristic, R., van der Hulst, L., Capone, D.L., Wilkinson, K.L. Impact of Bottle Aging on Smoke-Tainted Wines from Different Grape Cultivars. J Agric Food Chem. 2017 May 24; 65(20):4146-4152.
Ristic et al found that glycosidically bound oak aromas did indeed hydrolyze slowly during bottling due to wine's weakly acidic conditions. This resulted in increasing levels of volatile phenols. However, bottle aging of non smoke-tainted wines showed the same acid hydrolysis of the same volatile phenols over time in the bottle. The non smoke-tainted bottles did not develop smoky aromas and flavors, but the smoke-tainted bottles did. Thus, acid hydrolysis of glycosylated precursors could not be the cause of smoky flavors and aromas. Rather, the cause was diminished fruit flavor and aroma.
Szeto, C., Rsitic, R., Capone, D., Puglisi, C., Pagay, V., Culbert, J., Jiang, W., Herderich, M., Tuke, J., & Wilkinson, K. Uptake and Glycosylation of Smoke-Derived Volatile Phenols by Cabernet Sauvignon Grapes and their subsequent fate during winemaking. Molecules. 2020 Aug; 25(16):3720.
Determined that misting fruit zone during exposure to smoke resulted in a reduction in volatile phenol uptake but did not result in a reduction of smoky flavors and aromas.
Santa Rosa, CA - Since formally announcing its updated approach to smoke taint removal a month ago, Mavrik has kept a busy schedule of trials in California’s North coast.
In response to considerable demand, they take the show on the road to Oregon in May.
“Our crews routinely visit Oregon and Washington, but this will be a first look at our smoke taint solutions for many of our clients up there,” said Mariana Brown, Mavrik’s Winemaker and Operations Director.
While most were trying to devise ways to remove more flavors and aromas from affected wine in order to solve smoke taint, Mavrik was working to remove fewer flavors and aromas. Ultimately, a hybrid solution (treatment followed by a light fining) was chosen as the gentlest, most effective, and lowest cost solution.
Mavrik’s trial system quickly demonstrates these elements on one barrel or similar size volume.
Dates are still being determined, but trials will be available in Oregon in May.
A complete whitepaper and FAQ can be found at https://tinyurl.com/bzpufmx3
To schedule a trial while appointments are still available, winemakers can contact Mavrik at
707.320.0672 or info@mavrikna.com.
ABOUT MAVRIK NORTH AMERICA
Since 2007, Mavrik has offered wine elevating processes with at least one key improvement.
Low pressure VA removal and cellar temperature alcohol removal are only a few of the
highlights of those substantial advantages over alternative processes. With design, fabrication,
and services headquartered in Santa Rosa, CA Mavrik offers service, sales, and rental to the
worldwide alcoholic beverage industries
Sonoma County and Willamette Valley are our next two upcoming locations for convenient, local barrel trials. Contact us now to get on our schedule, appointments are limited. If you are outside of those areas, contact us to learn when we will offer trials in your area.
Read about how you are approaching smoke taint all wrong here.
While other services are grasping at straws and trying to remove anything and everything that "might" be smoke taint, we are bucking the trend and going the other direction. A narrow and targeted removal ensures that only smoky flavors and aromas are removed and not desirable wine flavors.
See how our focused approach leads to better resolution and better wine than the indiscriminate approaches offered elsewhere. info@mavrikna.com or 707.320.0672.
Read about how you are approaching smoke taint all wrong here. It will simplify how you approach smoke taint and make your solutions less costly and more effective.
"Thanks to you all for a job well done. There is a dramatic improvement on the finish of this wine. Once all that junk was removed, the finish became fruity again. I’m very pleased with the effort."
It is best when our customers speak for us. If you want the only process developed to remove smoke taint from wine gently, get in touch. No deconstruction, no drama, no collateral effects.
Seriously. Your wine is good, but it could be better.
How?
Alcohol balance in wine is nonlinear. A flight of the same wine, alcohol adjusted and blended in increments of 0.1% by volume, will have a few good wines scattered among a bunch of inferior wines.
Who Says?
Both novices and wine professionals pick out the same wines from these flights the vast majority of the time. So, your peers AND your customers say so--and they are in agreement.
No, It’s Not Just “Hot”.
High alcohol wine can taste “hot.” Reducing the alcohol can take the edge off, but it doesn’t always make a better wine. It might seem thin or harsh, or aromatically deficient. Merely reducing alcohol may not make your wine better if you don't hit the perfect balance. Unless you get lucky. Do you feel lucky?
“I Don’t Manipulate My Wine”
Understandable in a climate where vendors offer to squeeze, boil, vacuum, spin, strip essences, and do many other scary sounding things to your wine. But Mavrik’s process is just a proprietary membrane allowing a little alcohol, and nothing else, to gently seep out of your wine.
Prove It!
Over a decade ago, a client--Napa Cab retailing for 100s of dollars--challenged us to create a way to dial in alcohol precision without doing violence to their wine. Soon, they, and their friends, were giving us the entire lot to process because there was absolutely no harm done. Too good to be true? You wouldn’t be the first to think so.
Try it, You’ll Like it
Send us a sample of wine and we will reduce the alcohol and help you build a flight. You pick one of the Goldilocks wines in the flight and we turn the entire lot into that jewel. You’ll also see first hand why our clients conclude there is simply no collateral damage.
What We Need
9 liters of wine (1 case of 750ml or equivalent)
A few days turnaround
You blend a tasting flight with our guidance
You taste and choose the target alcohol for the blend
707.320.0672