TA...why bother?

It's true that pH is more important oenologically, but TA is more important organoleptically. TA is just an extra helpful peice of information, and there are situations where it can be helpful to have such data (e.g. for conducting deacidification).

Ben

For the most part, I agree with you Neil. I measure the TA before and at harvest, mainly to have data for history and a meaningful way to communicate with my growers, which is closely related to the first reason.

TA is a very important aspect of wine, but the bottom line is how it ultimately shows up on the palate, and this can be influenced by many factors like tannins, temperature, alcohol level and probably a few more, all of which won't be reflected in the titration numbers. So the measurements, at best, will only give you a ballpark ideal of the end results.

As for accuracy, I tend to think it's relatively simple to get consistant results, which in my book is more important than accuracy. If you're consistant and later find a discrepancy, it's simple to adjust all your historic figures! I do the TA titration by color change as using my meter (which is quite accurate but slow) is too slow. With a little practice, relatively consistant, if not accurate results, can be experienced.

I tend to not measure the TA beyond harvest and instead rely more upon how the wine actually tastes. I've nobody to reflect those figures with, and they really don't interest me otherwise.

clyde Steelville, Missouri, USofA