Jump to content

Vodka in pot stills or column?


RickWrightson

Recommended Posts

I believe most distillers make vodka with column stills. (Correct me if I'm not correct). Yet, Tito's Vodka is made in batches with pot stills (and distilled six times) - with great success!!! A double Gold and pushing 600,000 cases in 2011!!!

So, my question is, why not use a pot still to make vodka?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, too, had heard that Tito's was GNS redistilled in a pot still (gooseneck style without plates). Does anyone know the real story?

On the Tito's bottle, it says "Distilled and Bottled by Fifth Generation, Inc, Austin, TX". I had heard that in order to put "distilled by" on your vodka label, you would have to be the one who distilled it to 190 proof which would not occur using watered down GNS and a simple pot still. In that case, you could only put "produced by" on your label. So I thought that you could tell whether the vodka maker was using GNS by looking at this distinction on the label. Can anybody give me a clarification on the TTB rules regarding this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, my question is, why not use a pot still to make vodka?

Rick,

I guess it depends on what you mean by "make". In order to distill anything into 190 proof alcohol, you will need a column still. No ifs, ands, or buts.

That being said, most producers buy neutral grain spirit (190 proof vodka, essentially) from large distilleries who supply the vast majority of the NGS used to make vodka in the US. If the NGS is simply mixed with water, they may not say that they distilled it. However, what if they pass the NGS through a pot still at their own DSP? That's where things get a little murky...

But from a quality standpoint, I'd say that you should opt for a column still of your own if you prefer your vodka to have some "character", but if you're looking for a very "neutral" product, it's hard to do a better job than the big guys, especially if you're going to be redistilling it yourself anyway. And from a cost standpoint, the mass-produced NGS is also very attractive (their continuous stills are very, very energy efficient and their economies of scale are insane).

I had heard that in order to put "distilled by" on your vodka label, you would have to be the one who distilled it to 190 proof

I can't offer any clarification, but the way that I read the law, buying NGS and redistilling it in a pot still would neither preclude calling the product vodka nor claiming to have distilled it.

That being said, I find it unfortunate that the consumer has pretty much no way of knowing whether or not their vodka was distilled "from scratch" or merely redistilled from NGS. I would be behind an effort to make the distinction more clear.

Nick

P.S. As long as we're gossiping about Tito's, I heard that given the size of the still and the volume of sales, the numbers don't quite work out for him to actually pass all of that NGS through his little pot still at all anyway. Total unsubstantiated gossip, but I love it! Anyone know how big his still is? I can put a pen to paper as well as anyone else...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the same effect can be had with a simple pot still distilling many times over. of course a column is much more efficient time and energy wise.

I thought that another major difference between a column and repeated pot distillations was that the losses to "tails" involved in repeated pot distillations was so large as to lower the spirit yield to the point of becoming commercially unviable.

Is this not the case? Is anyone out there distilling from mash to 190 proof vodka using a pot still? If so, how many distillations does it take?

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the graph below shows how many passes are required to reach Azeotrope. the purple line shows progression from initial alcohol content to distilled alcohol content.

we can see that starting with a 10% wash will yeild a 53% distillate in single pass. 53% yeilds 80%. with each distillation you have diminishing returns, requiring over 10 distillations to reach azeotrope.

a Column of course allows you do many distillations in a single pass, requiring much less energy than simple distillation 10X over.

And yes Nick water and alcohol form an Azeotrope at both extremes, so you will always leave some ethanol in the boiler when you're done. column distillation reduces this to a one time loss.

plate chart.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Physics is your friend, but it all boils (no puns intended) down to yield and time and energy. Almost no one uses just a simple pot still for making any kind of vodka. Tall columns are more energy efficient but no better than shorter ones. It's all in what you can afford to do and what your customers will pay for the end result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The very term 'pot still' is problematic since a pot with a rectifying column on it is still, technically, a pot still. Better clarity can be achieved by talking about alembic stills and column stills, including both continuous and batch-type column stills under the colum still heading.

Using that terminology, it is possible but impractical to make vodka using alembics only, as it takes approximately ten passes to achieve legal neutrality.

Therefore, virtually all grain neutral spirit, i.e., vodka, is made in some type of column still. Most micro-distileries that make vodka from scratch use a batch-type column still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tito makes his vodka. Spreading malicious rumors is unkind. Unfounded rumors won't hurt Tito, but they make the mouthpiece look a fool.

I agree, Dave, and I wholeheartedly apologize to Tito (as if he'd even notice me) for being a thoughtless gossip. When people ask me for a comparable vodka to ours is, I proudly say, "Tito's".

Cowdry has brought us full circle back to the original question, "vodka in pot stills or column?" and has pointed out the difference between a continuous column and a batch column. I believe that everyone is in agreement that vodka can't be made from scratch on a pot still (except as an exercise in inefficiency), so if I may be so bold as to rephrase the question and continue the thread, I'd like to ask...

Vodka from scratch in continuous columns or batch columns?

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

the graph below shows how many passes are required to reach Azeotrope. the purple line shows progression from initial alcohol content to distilled alcohol content.

we can see that starting with a 10% wash will yeild a 53% distillate in single pass. 53% yeilds 80%. with each distillation you have diminishing returns, requiring over 10 distillations to reach azeotrope.

a Column of course allows you do many distillations in a single pass, requiring much less energy than simple distillation 10X over.

And yes Nick water and alcohol form an Azeotrope at both extremes, so you will always leave some ethanol in the boiler when you're done. column distillation reduces this to a one time loss.

plate%20chart.jpg

I utilize a batch column still for vodka production. I conduct an initial stripping run to ~mid 50%ABV so I have less volume to handle. I've gotten kickback in other forums stating it is dangerous to redistill anything over 40% ABV....which I thought was nonsense since, as listed above, someone utilizing a pot still for vodka production would never achieve 95% ABV! Plus I don't see a whole lot more danger since everything boils at some point in the column..whether in the boiler or near the top of the column! Either way you have to be careful but certainly have to be efficient as well. Anyways, from your graph it seems that I am correct and there should be no issue in redistilling product no matter the purity?

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I utilize a batch column still for vodka production. I conduct an initial stripping run to ~mid 50%ABV so I have less volume to handle. I've gotten kickback in other forums stating it is dangerous to redistill anything over 40% ABV....which I thought was nonsense since, as listed above, someone utilizing a pot still for vodka production would never achieve 95% ABV! Plus I don't see a whole lot more danger since everything boils at some point in the column..whether in the boiler or near the top of the column! Either way you have to be careful but certainly have to be efficient as well. Anyways, from your graph it seems that I am correct and there should be no issue in redistilling product no matter the purity?

Thanks!

No responses to confirm this?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks Guy. While I can certainly appreciate your concern in the name of staying on topic and keeping an "administrative" eye on things, I must admit that as a soon to be (Pending my control state's blessing) entrant into the up and coming craft spirit World, I personally would like to hear others read on those who have passed before us...ie....Tito Beveridge and how he got where he is today. Agreed, some posts got a bit off the topic and seemed to be heading off in directions not beneficial for the rest of us, the question and interest still remain....how did and equally important, does Tito's do what they do. Their wesbite says:

"Tito’s Handmade Vodka is produced in Austin at Texas’ first and oldest legal distillery. It’s made in small batches in an old fashioned pot still by Tito Beveridge (actual name), a 40-something Geologist, and distilled six times"

Tito's clearly claim that they make their vodka in pot stills....not columns. I'm totally cool with them holding their cards close to their chests and would simply like verification from someone in the know for my own understanding of how I might design/plan my system going forward. I certainly can't fault them if they chose to remain silent but from an operational standpoint, can question the viabilty of using a pot still vs. a column for making vodka. Isn't that the purpose of this forum? The dissemination of information in this rapidly growing and exciting World of craft spirits?

My take on it is pretty simple......As in governance, credibilty and leadership in the business world falls largely on transparency and the ability of those "In the know " to share with others the things that have allowed them to succeed without giving away the perverbial farm. If Tito's makes their own...why not speak up and tell their story...there will be many, including myself who will be beyond greatful for those folks' stories that contribute to the rising of the tide that will raise all of our boats (Had to go with a nautical analogy being a former Navy man and soon to be Rum distiller)

As an FYI....I've been known to enjoy Tito's Vodka now and again and strongly encourage them to keep doing whatever the hell they're doing and not mess up my abilty to make a kick ass Greyhound or Clamoto Bloody Mary!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was unaware of any insults in this thread that needed deleting, but so it goes. I rather enjoy spirited discussions (a pun!). Perhaps it was the recent blue moon causing confusion.

Everyone should reread this thread and pay attention to Cowdery's most informative post, "The very term 'pot still' is problematic since a pot with a rectifying column on it is still, technically, a pot still." In his words, a batch-type column still, but technically a pot still. It seems clear to me that is what Tito is using. We all (should) know the difference between some brands' (perfectly legal and acceptable) stated number of distillations and the number of complete physical passes through a still. There is no mystery here, just a guy who makes vodka. A lot of good vodka, in some very large pot stills.

Why anyone would think anyone else owes them a detailed explanation of the production methods of a successful product is beyond belief. And to avoid unfounded insinuations, may I suggest people stop using the word "claim" when you are referencing another's statements and replace it with "state"; as in "Tito states that he makes his vodka in pot stills" and "Dave states that he's not posting in this thread anymore".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument seems to be that while the continuous column is more efficient and, therefore, cost-effective, the batch column still affords finer control.

Cowdery, I guess I would like to offer a differing perspective on your assessment of "finer control". A properly designed continuous column can maintain a temperature difference at the spirit plate of +/- 1/10 of a degree F. That kind of control vastly exceeds that of a batch-column still.

The batch-column still, has the inherent flaw of being controlled via heat input at the pot, and then relying on specifically designed column diameter, height, and internals to produce a 190+ vodka.

I agree that many continuous columns in the industry are less precise, per your suggestion, because they do not manage overhead reflux & temperature control. Basically they use big direct steam injection columns designed to produce a certain product at the spirit plate without the ability to manipulate that product quality based upon reflux temperature control.

However, in stills such as mine, I can manipulate the conditions of the spirit plate by changing reflux conditions, therefore affording a much higher degree of control. For instance, if I think that a corn vodka has a better profile at 178.2F while a rye vodka has a better profile at 180.1F, then I can change the temperature controller on my still to give hit those marks precisely.

Overall, Cowdery your comment regarding precision is true in the industry as a whole, but in my CF still and a few other instances CF column stills have "finer controls" by an order of magnitude over batch-column stills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My comment was my assessment of the consensus here when we have previously had this discussion and was not my personal opinion, as I am insufficiently expert on that matter to have one. I very much appreciate the contrary information you've provided, but it's not me you're disagreeing with. It's most of the folks here who operate batch-type column stills and seems to be the sole reason they think pot (i.e., batch) stills with rectification columns are superior to continuous stills. I'll be interested to see if any of them disagree with you, but I'm not the one to disagree with you. With my limited expertise, I tend to think the notion that pot stills are inherently superior to column stills is myth, and I think that because that's what I've been told by professionals in the industry.

This all began, for me at least, when micro-distillers started bragging about their 'pot stills,' stating or implying that pot stills are superior, when in fact they are not even using alembics, they are using batch-type column stills, what I dubbed 'hybrid' stills. Ultimately, their rationale for a batch-type column still's superiority was this notion of finer control inherent in the ability of a batch still to keep distilling the same beer over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

HI folks,

I'm rather new here so I humbly ask my question:

If one wants to re-distill GNS, in order to clean it up some more. (i.e to remove some of the harsher chemicals in the alcohol)

Can a simple pot still be used? To clarify from the above comments, I'm not talking about a pot still with a plated column on top;

Rather a simple large pot still (more like an alembic still) or, will it be much more effective to separate using a pot with a

column and plates. Lastly, if it's better to use a pot with a column and plates, should all of the plates be activated or open?

Thank you in avance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI folks,

I'm rather new here so I humbly ask my question:

If one wants to re-distill GNS, in order to clean it up some more. (i.e to remove some of the harsher chemicals in the alcohol)

Can a simple pot still be used? To clarify from the above comments, I'm not talking about a pot still with a plated column on top;

Rather a simple large pot still (more like an alembic still) or, will it be much more effective to separate using a pot with a

column and plates. Lastly, if it's better to use a pot with a column and plates, should all of the plates be activated or open?

Thank you in avance.

You will only make a GNS worse by attempting to redistill it. Get a Lab Analysis from the vendor, you'll see there is nothing in the GNS that you can possibly take out or make better....with any type of still, much less a pot still.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI folks,

I'm rather new here so I humbly ask my question:

If one wants to re-distill GNS, in order to clean it up some more. (i.e to remove some of the harsher chemicals in the alcohol)

Can a simple pot still be used? To clarify from the above comments, I'm not talking about a pot still with a plated column on top;

Rather a simple large pot still (more like an alembic still) or, will it be much more effective to separate using a pot with a

column and plates. Lastly, if it's better to use a pot with a column and plates, should all of the plates be activated or open?

Thank you in avance.

HI folks,

I'm rather new here so I humbly ask my question:

If one wants to re-distill GNS, in order to clean it up some more. (i.e to remove some of the harsher chemicals in the alcohol)

Can a simple pot still be used? To clarify from the above comments, I'm not talking about a pot still with a plated column on top;

Rather a simple large pot still (more like an alembic still) or, will it be much more effective to separate using a pot with a

column and plates. Lastly, if it's better to use a pot with a column and plates, should all of the plates be activated or open?

Thank you in avance.

I recently returned a shipment of GNS to a very reputable vendor because the tote contained a significant amount of dirt. I know another distillery that refused shipment of an entire railcar of GNS because it was tainted with diesel (whoops, wrong railcar). In both cases, the "guaranteed" analysis from the vendor made no mention of these taints.

I would maintain that you will not be able to remove a significant amonunt of chemicals from GNS by redistillation in a pot still (although you would probably be able to remove dirt). But does this also mean that you won't improve the flavor through redistillation? Absolutely not.

When it comes to questions of flavor, the only thing that you can really trust is the human palate. Not only will the palate detect taints such as diesel, it is also a very affordable way to answer these questions that you have for yourself.

Throw some GNS through your still, and compare it to the original product in a blind tasting. It will either be better, worse, or indistinguishable.

Then take action as you see fit based on your own personal experience.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...