Skip to content
CiderHQ
Search

Perry pear

Brandy

A high-sugar Herefordshire perry pear whose name records the strength of the perry it makes rather than any flavour of brandy.

Also written Brandy Pear.

Classification
Sweet — Perry pear classification
Harvest
Late (Late October)
Single varietal
Sometimes bottled on its own
Blend role
Sugar and body, Late season
Origin
Herefordshire
Species
Pyrus communis
Flowering
Mid flowering band
Vigour
Vigorous
Biennial bearing
Markedly biennial — heavy and light years alternate
Keeping
Moderate

How it is classified

Perry pear classification

Sweet

Low acid, low tannin. Mild perry pears giving soft, light perry.

Low acid and low tannin with high sugar. Accounts that emphasise its strength sometimes describe it as bittersweet; the tannin reported is not high enough to support that under the scheme’s own thresholds.

Every classification on CiderHQ names its system. Why there is more than one.

What it contributes to a blend

A direction, not a measurement. These bands are the level of resolution the evidence supports, and they say which way adding this fruit pushes a blend rather than what the finished cider will be.

Contribution to a blend, scored 1–5 as a band. The filled segment is the typical value; the paler segments are the range.
AxisTypicalRange
AcidLow
TanninLight
SugarVery high
BitternessSlight
AstringencySlight
AromaPresent
BodyFull
Based on: its recorded classification

The sweet-class placement in the Long Ashton account, with the sugar band raised on the consistent description of unusually dense juice.

Dense, low-acid juice of high sugar content, giving weight and alcohol rather than sharpness or grip.

Aroma

No aroma descriptors are recorded for Brandy, and for a great deal of cider fruit that is a finding rather than a gap. Bittersweet apples in particular contribute tannin, sugar and body while being close to aromatically mute, and most of what a cider made from them smells of was produced by the fermentation rather than carried in by the fruit. CiderHQ publishes the absence rather than filling the space with descriptors nothing supports.

Put Brandy into a blend

Measured analysis

Each figure is shown with where and when it was taken. They are not averaged: the same cultivar grown in another climate genuinely gives different numbers, and collapsing them into one would be the most misleading thing this page could do.

Reported analyses of Brandy, by property and source
PropertyReadingWhereWhenSource
Specific gravity3 readings, spanning 1.053–1.069 SG1.069 SGLong Ashton Research Station, near Bristol, North Somerset, England1903–1963Historic analysisNational Association of Cider Makers, Archive of Cider Pomology
1.053 SGGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
1.057 SGGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2022–2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Titratable acidity2 readings, spanning 2.9–4.4 g/L4.4 g/LLong Ashton Research Station, near Bristol, North Somerset, England1903–1963Historic analysisNational Association of Cider Makers, Archive of Cider Pomology
2.9 g/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Total tannin2 readings, spanning 120.0–730.0 mg/L120.0 mg/LLong Ashton Research Station, near Bristol, North Somerset, England1903–1963Historic analysisNational Association of Cider Makers, Archive of Cider Pomology
730.0 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Free amino nitrogen4.9 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
pH3.47 pHGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2022–2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Phenolic acids330.0 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Proline23.8 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Sorbitol10.0–30.0 g/LVarious growing sites; the literature pools pear juice analyses rather than reporting by orchardVarious journals and institute reports
Total amino acids41.2 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)
Total phenolics1050.0 mg/LGloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties, England2024Modern analysisCider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)

3 properties here have been measured more than once. The readings are shown as they were taken and are deliberately not averaged — climate, season, ripeness at picking, the age of the tree and the analytical method all move these numbers, and a single figure would hide every one of them. Where a spread is given below a property, it is the distance between separate studies, not the variation within any one of them.

How these were measured
  • Juice density. Published by the source in the four-figure form (1058) and written here in full.
  • Titration, reported as malic acid. Published as a percentage and stored here in grams per litre by exact conversion — one per cent weight per volume is ten grams per litre — so that the historic figures sit in one column with the modern survey the site also holds.
  • Löwenthal permanganate titration. Published as a percentage and stored here in milligrams per litre by exact conversion — one per cent weight per volume is ten thousand milligrams per litre — so that the historic figures sit in one column with the modern survey the site also holds.
  • Juice pressed from fruit collected in the Three Counties and frozen before analysis. Published to five decimal places and shown at the three the site displays.
  • Titration, reported as malic acid.
  • “True tannin” — the polymerised phenolic fraction, measured separately from the phenolic acids. Published in grams per litre and stored here in milligrams per litre by exact conversion.
  • Phenolic acids measured separately from the tannin fraction. Published in grams per litre and stored here in milligrams per litre by exact conversion.
  • The sum of the true tannin and phenolic acid fractions as the surveyor reports it. Published in grams per litre and stored here in milligrams per litre by exact conversion.
  • HPLC. The whole amino acid pool by mass, assimilable and non-assimilable together.
  • Free amino nitrogen, calculated from the individual amino acids as nitrogen available to yeast. Excludes proline.
  • HPLC.
  • Juice gravity of the separate batch taken for the single-variety fermentation trial, before any sugar adjustment.
  • Meter on the fermentation-trial juice before adjustment.
  • A general pear juice figure, not an analysis of Brandy. It matters on this record because a cultivar already high in fermentable sugar produces a perry of unusual strength that nonetheless retains the sorbitol sweetness, which is how a dry-fermented Brandy perry can read as both strong and sweet. The range is not tied to a single study or season.
  • Long Ashton perry pear analyses, reaching CiderHQ through a National Association of Cider Makers report compiled in 2010 from the station’s material. The underlying volume is Luckwill and Pollard, Perry Pears (University of Bristol, 1963), which CiderHQ has verified bibliographically and not opened. The compiler warns that juice quality in perry pears improves markedly with tree age, and that young trees give weaker acid and tannin and a lower gravity. A single figure for a perry pear is therefore a figure for a tree of some unstated age.
  • Long Ashton perry pear analyses, reaching CiderHQ through a National Association of Cider Makers report compiled in 2010 from the station’s material. The underlying volume is Luckwill and Pollard, Perry Pears (University of Bristol, 1963), which CiderHQ has verified bibliographically and not opened. A permanganate figure, not comparable with a Folin–Ciocalteu total-phenolics figure.
  • One sample from one source in one season. The surveyor reports the same variety differing markedly between years, sites and tree types, and publishes the samples separately rather than pooling them.
  • Measured as “true tannin” — the polymerised phenolic fraction — separately from the phenolic acids. It is not a Folin–Ciocalteu total and not a permanganate total, and should be compared only with figures produced the same way.
  • Perry pear juice runs far lower in assimilable nitrogen than cider apple juice, a difference the Long Ashton workers reported and this survey confirms across most of the varieties sampled. Several readings here sit below the level at which a ferment is generally expected to need feeding.
  • Proline is an amino acid a wine or cider yeast cannot assimilate without oxygen, so it does not count towards usable nitrogen. In these pear juices it routinely exceeds the whole assimilable amino pool, which is why a perry must can be rich in amino acids and starved of nitrogen at the same time.
  • The four fermentation trials were chaptalised by differing amounts to hit a common alcohol target, so the finished strengths are not a property of the fruit and CiderHQ does not record them as measurements. The juice gravity and juice pH below are measurements of the juice as pressed, before any adjustment.

Compare within a study to see where these figures sat among the other cultivars the same work analysed — which is a more robust statement than the figures themselves, because absolute values move between laboratories and the ordering inside one study mostly survives.

Watched in the orchard

What named research programmes recorded about this fruit at their own sites. Bloom, harvest and cropping belong to a place and a run of seasons rather than to a cultivar, so they are reported site by site rather than merged.

Long Ashton perry pear varieties

Long Ashton Research Station, near Bristol, North Somerset, England · 1903–1963 · National Association of Cider Makers, Archive of Cider Pomology

Maritime and mild. The station sat outside the perry counties it studied — the pears are Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire fruit — which is worth holding in mind when a figure here is compared with one measured on fruit picked in the Three Counties.

Harvest
First to fourth week of October
Growth habit
Small–medium
Bearing
Heavy, biennial
Held as
Listed as “Brandy”
Tasted at this site

Medium acid, low tannin, bland, aromatic, dark. Average.

Recorded by the programme from professional cidermakers in the region. One panel, one place, one set of seasons — a description of these ciders rather than of the cultivar everywhere.

Marked by the compiler as a variety whose juice quality improves greatly with tree age: a young tree gives weaker acid, weaker tannin and a much lower gravity than the figures here.

Juice analysis: specific gravity, acidity by titration as malic acid, tannin by Löwenthal permanganate titration. Acid and tannin are published as percentages and stored here in grams per litre by exact conversion. Vigour, cropping habit, maturity window and a vintage quality assessment are the compiler’s summary of the station’s descriptions.

Three Counties perry pear juice survey

Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and neighbouring counties — the perry country itself, rather than a research station elsewhere · 2022–2024 · Cider and Perry Academy (Peter Mitchell)

The lower Severn and Wye vales: mild, wet, and the only ground in Britain where perry pears have ever been grown at scale. Fruit was collected across three autumns, and the survey reports each collection separately rather than pooling the seasons.

Held as
Sample By-Oct24
Tasted at this site

Final gravity 1.00243 and 7.29% ABV. The most aromatic and complex of the four in the tasting that followed, and the only one in which a terpene — terpinen-4-ol — was tentatively identified.

Recorded by the programme from professional cidermakers in the region. One panel, one place, one set of seasons — a description of these ciders rather than of the cultivar everywhere.

Juice from single varieties, frozen before analysis. Specific gravity; titratable acidity by titration as malic acid; “true tannin” and phenolic acids measured as separate fractions; individual amino acids by HPLC, with free amino nitrogen calculated from them and proline reported apart because yeast cannot assimilate it anaerobically. Where samples differed by location, tree age or year, they are reported separately.

In the orchard

Harvest window
Late
Flowering
Mid flowering band
Vigour
Vigorous
Cropping
Markedly biennial — heavy and light years alternate
Keeping
Moderate

October. Later than most of the Three Counties crop, and worth waiting for: the sugar continues to build, which is the whole point of the cultivar. The National Perry Pear Collection records it ripening in the first half of October at Hartpury, one band earlier than the late window recorded here.

Better than most perry pears, though that is a low bar. The fruit holds for a little over a week in cool conditions before the flesh breaks down.

Mid to late flowering, which gives it some protection from spring frost. The National Perry Pear Collection places it in the mid flowering band, from flowering records kept over many seasons. The collection lists it in two adjacent bands, mid and late, which is what a variety whose blossom straddles a boundary looks like in a table with four columns.

Pears need a pollinator

Pears are not self-fertile. A variety needs another in blossom at the same time to set fruit, which is why the flowering band matters more in a perry orchard than the harvest window does.

Ripening moves with the site and the season. Where the National Perry Pear Collection’s observation at Hartpury falls in a different band from the window recorded here, both are kept rather than one overwriting the other.

Disease and pest susceptibility

Recorded susceptibility. Pressure differs enormously by region and by season, so these are tendencies rather than predictions.
IssueSusceptibilityNote
Pear scabmoderate
Self-incompatibilityhigh

Juice and pressing

How it is used

On its own

Sometimes bottled on its own

A single-variety Brandy perry is heavy and low in acid, and readily tastes flat without something sharper alongside it. Where it is made alone, the interest is the weight rather than the balance.

About Brandy

Brandy is a Herefordshire perry pear named for what its juice does rather than for what the fruit is like. It sits in a small group of perry pear names — Brandy, Gin, Sack — that describe the drink in terms of stronger drinks, and the naming should be read as ethnography rather than as description: it records how a farming community categorised its own produce, not any resemblance to a spirit. The fruit itself is unremarkable to look at.

What distinguishes it is sugar. The juice is dense and low in acid, and it carries enough fermentable sugar to push a perry well above the strength that a Blakeney Red or a Thorn would reach. Because pears also carry sorbitol, which yeast cannot use, a Brandy perry fermented to the end of its fermentable sugar keeps a real sweetness alongside that strength. This is the combination that gave the pear its name, and it is why it was planted in orchards that otherwise grew sharper fruit.

It is a blending pear more than a solo one. On its own the low acid leaves the perry heavy and slack, and the useful thing to do with it is to put weight underneath a sharper cultivar. It ripens in October, later than most, and keeps a little better than the average perry pear, which is a modest but real advantage for a mill working through a season’s fruit.

Names, origin and identity

Cultivar naming is the hardest problem in cider fruit data. The same tree carries different names across ten miles, and two different trees have shared a name for two centuries.

Origin · traditional account

No documented raising. The name belongs to a group of perry pear names — Brandy, Gin, Sack — that describe the drink’s effect or strength rather than the fruit.

Other names this fruit is known by. Each is a name for the same cultivar, not a separate one — which is why none of them has a page of its own.
NameKindNote
GinDisputed identityBrandy and Gin are separate cultivars that are frequently paired in nursery lists and occasionally conflated in orchard records. The names belong to the same naming habit, not to the same tree.

The National Perry Pear Collection’s identifications are supported by DNA analysis of the trees it holds, which is why they are treated here as the stronger account where they conflict with a documentary one. Where the collection records a name for two varieties it holds as distinct, the name identifies a group of trees rather than one variety, and fruit offered under it needs checking against something other than its label.

Related cultivars

Recorded relationships, including the ones this fruit is routinely confused with.

Fruit that plays a similar part

Cultivars sharing a classification under the same system and a comparable role in a blend. Not a similarity score — a stated relationship.

Styles it is characteristic of

Where it grows

What people ask next

Questions readers ask about the things this page mentions. Each one goes to the section that answers it rather than to a page written to receive the question.

Where to go next

Sources

What this page rests on. Where a source is marked as registered rather than read, CiderHQ is recording that the body is authoritative on the subject without claiming to have worked through the document itself. See our evidence policy for what each state means.

Research Evidence standard for this record. What that means.