Artisanal Wines Versus Laboratory Wines: a provocation.

[Guest]

Why wines taste all the same around the world.

Well, this is my point of view; I'm no enology expert, I'm just being part of a family that drinks wine at every meal for generations now. Like many in France and in Italy. When I was a child, at my grand-father meals, they didn't have water on the table, only wine. Water would be added only for children if present, or if someone asked, after a bad glaze.

My grand-fathers never sipped their wine looking at how it was clear or exclaming "cherry!" or "strwaberry!" (or better "RA17 yeast!", I will explain later why), but just drank it in the most natural way; and more, I have never seen none of them drinking their wine in a glass big like a pot - so big-nosed like my have to reverse their head to drink - but always in normal sized glasses, maybe a beatiful crystal glass, but always normal sized.

And I do the same, for respect of my family; you see I'm no expert, and I claim no expertise, I cannot recognize cherries or strwaberries or ICV-D254, or ageing, etc.; I just pursue a way of life. You see, we always search for the best handmade products in clothing. The best of the bespoke, and beatifully detailed garments. I search for the same in wine: what does it mean?

99% of the wine around the world is made by selected yeast today. A small background. Today the vineyard are completely dried by herbicedes; nothing as to live there if not the vineyard itself; making so, the vineyard has nothing to eat, so they need a lot of fetilizers; but fertilizers do not go down in the ground as the vineyard would need, so they need to put nitrates (like salt for us to understand): the vineyard get thirsty so it eat his fetilizers. You see, already a lot of chemicals involved here. Now, you get the grapes: but, since you have killed almost anything there, you do not have naturally produced yeasts, or you have too few; yeasts are microorganisms that are needed to transform what now is a grape juice in wine, and they give to it color and taste in the proceedings. So? You add selected yeasts: they are selected from yeasts around the world, and generated amd modified in laboratory; you have yeasts for the right color, maybe you want deep burgundy? You will want famous BGY yeast; you want cherry flavour? Then you need RA17. There are yeast for every need:

http://www.lallemandwine.us/products/yeast_strains.php

Ah! before adding selected yeats,better to kill the last natural yeast in your grape juice, by adding SO2; you cannot risk a bad wine.

Yes, this is done because farmers now do not want to risk a bad year; this way they are always sure the wine is good, and will look good; every year. And it is good as you open your bottle, but will not improve much in times by ageing. You have a standard wine; so this is why today all the wines are similar, no matter if your pinot noir is from borgogne or italy or australia, or 1998 or 2000. Everyone, 99% probable, is using RA17 and getting same taste.

There is a small commnuty of farmers and producers that are not conforming to this way of producing; no herbicedes, old manual work in the vineyard, a living vineyard not dead arid, no chemicals, no added yeasts and no SO2. They are mainly in France, but are expanding in Italy, California and Austrlia too. Wines so produced is highly dependable on the ground; his taste comes from there, not from RA17.

As always you can buy and taste what you want, important is that yo do so when correctly informed. I always ask if they use selected yeast when buying a wine; if they used herbicedes in the vineyards. I want to know what I buy; maybe I buy the same, but I like to know. Before saying ahhhh RA17 here!


Giona Granata.

[RWS]

You're quite accurate, Giona: in wine, as in nearly everything else, the world aims at widespread availability of good product. That the successful attempts to increase production of fairly good wine has both annihilated diversity and reduced the availability of excellent as well as of grossly inferior wine is beside the point: in wine, as well as in clothing, so many sadly misled customers are satisfied by label or appearance, for they've trusted advertising (of all things!) and the mass opinions created largely by that advertising.

If there's a lesson to be learned here, it's to educate oneself and, then, to trust one's own informed opinion. Thankfully, we have in the Lounge the means to learn and the opportunity to sharpen our own instincts through exchanges with other informed (or better-informed!), free-thinking enthusiasts.

[Guest]

You hit the point RWS! Exactly.

I do not want to sell my TRUTH; go out there and learn; visit farmers, vineyards, ask them what they do, which process do they use, what do they add and why; make your own idea. Just as you do with tailors.

I wait for more opinions on wine and winemaking!

Giona.

[alden]

There are wines whose taste is the expression of the parcel of land where they were produced, known as "terroir" wines and there are chemically modified test tube wines.

Terroir means that on a given parcel of land, the soil will render a wine that is the unique expression of that parcel of earth as communicated via the minerals that have been absorbed into the juice of a specific grape type.

Test tube wines can be made with virtually any grape juice and sold with a taste created to appeal to a specific clientele. These are sometimes referred to as "international" wines.

Both "terroir" and "test tube" wines can be made either naturally i.e. "biodynamically" ("biodynamie") or they can be made more prolifically by using chemicals, fertilizers, pesticides etc.

In recent years in France we have seen the marriage of great terroir parcels with biodynamic methods. The results are extraordinary wines. However, an excellent terroir wine can also be produced with non-bio methods with the risk that the "character" of the wine maybe distorted by the presence of chemicals.

The greatest terroir producers work the vines such that the roots reach as deeply into the earth as possible to find the mineral components that will render the maximum expression. Vines are kept short so all the potential energy is directed under ground into the roots. Bunches of grapes are reduced to just a few bunches per vine to maximize the concentration of the wine that will be produced.

Without the use of chemicals and pesticides, and with the increased concentration of manual work on the vine and reduced number of bunches per vine, the harvest of biodynamic terroir wines is much less than what we would see from more industrial productions. Its productions costs are also much higher. So these great wines are more costly and more difficult to produce. Just like a natural shouldered, unpadded coat is harder, more labor and talent intensive, to make than one stuffed with padding.

Wine is a bit like oil. You can drive the roots of vines deep into the earth, but if the earth is not suitable they will find nothing. If you find a magical tiny "clos" like one in Romanee-Conti you have hit a gusher. And of course certain terroir are better for certain grape types. If you grow Pinot Noir in earth destined for Syrah, don't be surprised that the result is not the best.

For this reason top wine "agronomists"/ consultants are as highly paid and sought after as consultants specialized in winemaking itself. They can recognize the mineral components in the earth and determine if there is a chance that a "mother lode" of premium Cabernet Sauvignon is there or not! I have the great fortune to know some of the great Italian specialists and as recently as last week was sending samples of earth to them hoping to hit the gusher in Sicily. We shall see.....

In any case, your comments regarding "artisanale", "handmade" , or "naturally made" wine does have a relation to all the products we search for here in the LL whether it be sartorial or gastronomic products, furnishing or artwork.

[RWS]

. . . . [T]op wine "agronomists"/ consultants . . . . can recognize the mineral components in the earth and determine if there is a chance that a "mother lode" of premium Cabernet Sauvignon is there or not! I have the great fortune to know some of the great Italian specialists and as recently as last week was sending samples of earth to them hoping to hit the gusher in Sicily. . . .

Will vintage 2015 be available to the Lounge for toasts to our founder beginning in 2024?

[alden]

Still in the exploratory stages, but you never know. There is a little parcel of 16 hectares half on the plain and half hill, Southerly exposure, not far from the sea. If the soil is right, it would be a perfect place to grow the Islands "Nero D'Avola." The first visit from a geologist is thumbs up and now its the turn of the specialist agronomist to have his say. The earth in the area is legendary for its fertility and richness. La Planeta has made huge investments nearby, 60 hectares planted and producing good wines.

Michael

[Droogie]

For better or worse, the following article addresses the way it is going for right now.

---------------------------------

Bordeaux center of gravity shifts from grape-grower to winemaker

by Beatrice Le BohecThu Oct 5, 11:56 AM ET


The French winemaker's mantra has always been "grow good grapes and the wine will make itself," but for all save the most prestigious estates letting nature take its course is no longer good enough.

Indeed, a perfect storm of over-production, withering domestic demand, and pitiless competition from the New World has forced the center of gravity in France's wine business to shift from the grape-growing to increasingly technical art of winemaking.

While often loath to admit it, many French producers are now crafting their wares to suit consumer tastes rather than expecting consumers to adapt to the product.

In California or Australia this is seen as a common-sense approach, but in France -- where the mystique of "terroir" has always reigned supreme -- allowing the market to dictate what the wine will taste like is a vaguely heretical notion.

There is no better measure of this profound change than the growing influence and importance of wine chemists -- also called oenologists -- in Bordeaux, France's premier wine producing region.

"In 10 years, oenologists have evolved from vine doctor to winemaker," said the president of association representing Bordeaux's wine chemists, Nicolas
Guichard.

"Whereas before there was no problem selling, today the wine producer must call into question the product he is making."

More and more small-scale wine producers are turning to wine chemists for guidance throughout the entire winemaking process, from crushing the grapes to bottling, regional experts say.

"The tilting point was economic -- all production is for naught as soon as it is disconnected from the market," said Jean-Philippe Gervais, head of the vine-and-wine services department of the Gironde region's Chamber of Agriculture. "The oenologist today has a better understanding of marketing, and the imperatives of supply and demand."

For Laurent Charlier, scientific director the trade organization that groups Bordeaux's wine makers, the growing role of oenologists also stems from improved technology, especially in analytic tools.

"Before, we were only monitored the sugar and acidity levels in the grapes, but today we can measure aromas, tannins and many other variables. We have discovered that other molecules can be a good measure of a successful fermentation," he said.

Tannins, found primarily in the skins of grapes, produce an astringency essential to the flavor and stability in wine.


In general, winemaking has evolved from alchemy to science, becoming a highly technical process in which dozens of variables can be manipulated through chemical and mechanical means.

The six centers in France that churn out graduates armed with the prestigious national diploma of oenology are changing to meet the new demands of the market place, said Gervais.

In theory, wine chemists adapt to the needs of the grape-grower and winemaker, more often than not the same person in France.

But an increasing number of private laboratories are adopting new techniques to produce wines that -- while high in quality -- are, some critics say, uniform products divorced from the specific characteristics of the soil and climate of a given micro-region, what the French call "terroir."

Gervais, during a recent wine tasting in Bordeaux, admitted recognizing the signature taste of a particular consultant. "But we have not yet become like standardized yogurt manufacturers, far from it," he insisted.

New World producers have long emphasized the importance of what happens after the grapes are picked. One top American wine writer recently explained why California should not adopt a French-style classification system based on grape-growing regions.

"The perfect classification system of California wines wouldn't be based on estates or vineyards but on the winemakers themselves," opined Lettie Teague, executive wine editor of Food and Wine. "It was the winemakers, after all, who first made California famous," she wrote.

It is still true today that the darlings of the California wine world are not the grape growers or even estate owners so much as for-hire winemakers.

Professor Bernard Doneche, head of the faculty of oenology in Bordeaux, graduates 60 new wine experts every year. He says their job is to improve the raw on the raw material to make a better wine.

"But to succeed in the market, he should also be capable of producing the kind of sweet or oak-flavored wine that one finds everywhere these days," he acknowledges.

[lancepryor]

There is another major factor driving the homogenization of wine around the world: consumers' reliance on the wine ratings of a few wine critics, most notably Robert Parker and, to a lesser degree, the Wine Spectator. If a wine gets a high Parker rating, it is sure to be a best seller and will support increased prices over time, so savvy winemakers tailor their wines to satisfy Parker's palate. Parker loves big, rich, ripe reds, so what do we see becoming the dominant style of wine today? Of course, the same type of wines.

In the past, wine buyers tended to rely on a favored retailer's advice, or they stuck with a few winemakers; today, with the explosion of choices, the increase in prices, and the challenge of finding a good retailer, many consumers use Parker's ratings as the sole criterion in selecting wines; they will pass up an '85' point wine in favor of a '90' point wine, without ever tasting the former, which they might actually like better. Further, the growth in popularity of wine has created many consumers who see wine as a trophy, another way of competing with and one-upping others by having lots of highly-rated wines in their cellar, notwithstanding the fact that they can't tell a Cabernet from a Pinot Noir.

Finally, winemaking has become a very big business, and the costs and risks of making wines has increased substantially, so makers have a strong motivation to limit risks and increase the odds of success. Thus, they have even greater motivation to cater to Parker's palate.

Certainly the critics have done some good -- calling out lousy wines, driving demand for artisanal products and less-intrusive winemaking techniques, allowing growers to sell finished wines rather grapes or juice to negotiants, etc. Whether the good outweighs the bad is another matter....

[couch]

Excellent thread. I heartily agree with Giona that not every glass of wine should be treated as a precious theatrical event, although I may perhaps be more tolerant of good stemware well used, as an aid to enjoyment and sensory education. But I've had wonderful wines in Luminarc tumblers at country auberges, and would never trade those memories.

I do regret the diversity RWS mourns; there are other values besides fruit, concentration and high alcohol numbers. Some of the best examples are as much the product of local winemaking culture as local terroir, but all are under siege. I became very fond of old-style Rioja clarete, often derided as "oaked to death", with its dry light body and dusty finish, where the balance between well-integrated oak tannin and acidity was what mattered, and fruit was not particularly relevant except as a source for complex flavor components on aging. It was / is a very distinctive wine, well adapted to many wonderful food pairings in Spanish cuisine, and especially to luncheon, traditionally the most elaborate meal in most parts of Spain. But it's an acquired taste, and one has to be willing on first sip to accept that it succeeds at a different aim than the "international style" flavor profile, rather than simply missing the mark. As RWS says, the "modern" Marques de Caceres-type Riojas are good in their way, but always less distinctive and thus mere commodities, while an old Muga or Castillo Ygay or Viña Tondonia is a subtle and unmistakable pleasure, as eloquent of its origins as a highland tweed or a Neapolitan shoulder. Learning, or connoisseurship (I mean this term in its technical sense, without derogatory or pretentious associations), is among other things the process of discovering such distinctive elements--one might say of learning to recognize and properly appreciate aesthetic biodiversity.

One hopes the recent vogue for "biodynamic" viticulture and its ilk continues. As the market segments, though, it would be nice if some artisanal, terroir-aware, regionally inflected wines remain at moderate price points, and we don't end up with a simple split between manufactured wine and luxury artisanal bottlings. Meanwhile, I'm always eager to expand my range, while some variety still remains. It still amazes me that the range of dry sherries and the small-grower champagnes, given the enormous labor required to produce them, remain as affordable as they are.

[alden]

I don't know what the market is in other countries but you can drink great, natural wines in France for under 10 euros a bottle. So they do not have to be expensive wines.

The best way to tell if you are drinking a well made natural wine or one doped on chemicals is judging the concentration of taste in the mouth: how long does it last? Professional wine tasters measure the length of this pleasurable experience in seconds. They rate the quality of a wine in relation to both the intensity and duration of this lingering of taste.

Concentration, what the French call matiere, leads to wines with "length." Wines created in test tubes, while they may have a pleasant taste, most assuredly will not have "length." Or if there is a bit of length to the taste, it will turn at the very end evaporating in a medicinal flavored way. It's a good way to spot a cleverly manipulated grape beverage from wine.

It still amazes me that the range of dry sherries and the small-grower champagnes, given the enormous labor required to produce them, remain as affordable as they are.

Hush!

Parker loves big, rich, ripe reds, so what do we see becoming the dominant style of wine today? Of course, the same type of wines.

Parker's role in all of this is most evident in the top 1% luxury wine market, where his judgement can mean instant success. His opinions are less heeded in France and in Europe as opposed to the New World(s) of wine where he is venerated. I must say that I have respect for the man and his accomplishments.

[Droogie]

To be clear and absolutely correct, there are plentiful "natural" wines that will not have complexity. This will be due to the vintage, vines, and winemaker's skill or intentions. Obviously, many wines, including dry ones, are meant to be light and straightforward.

Moreover, wines that are subjected to substantial manipulation during vinification can certainly be complex, albeit with some or much of its regional character lost. Such manipulation does not rely on chemicals but on the multitude of decisions that the winemaker and vineyard make (e.g., pruning, vine age/mix, desired acreage yield, moment of picking, temperature and length of fermentation, yeast selection, blending, acidity, residual sugar, secondary fermentation, oak barrel vs. steel cask, oak source, oak chips, time in barrel, age of barrel, etc., to name just a few obvious ones).

The Australians are known to be on the cutting edge of science in their viniculture and winemaking.

[alden]

pruning, vine age/mix, desired acreage yield, moment of picking,

These are four agricultural and not vinification decisions.

temperature and length of fermentation, yeast selection, blending, acidity, residual sugar, secondary fermentation, oak barrel vs. steel cask, oak source, oak chips, time in barrel, age of barrel,

These relate to vinification. The addition of "oak chips" into wine is a completely absurd practice. The choice of yeasts sounds pretty benign except that there are aromatized yeasts (raspberry, RA-17 cherry, what flavor do you want?) that are used to give the wine a particular taste and or color. And there are all the kinds of industrial flavorings that one associates with toothpaste and not wine.

I any case, it is good to know that there is a natural wine movement in Australia. But if the wines contain chemical preservatives, artifical flavorings,, sulfites, sulfur and the like we can't consider them natural. These are chemicals, they are not techniques, they are chemicals. If they are in the wine, it's not natural.

There are well made natural wines from excellent vines and "terroir"; there are mediocre natural wines from less advantaged areas and less skilled winemakers.

The point is that the winemaker has to spend a lot of time and money working the land and vines to produce a concentrated "terroir" wine. It's not at all glamorous. The other beverages can be made from any grape juice in a lab with guys in white cotton coats and rubber gloves. Its neat, its efficient and its result is not wine.[/quote]

[alden]

http://www.wineterroirs.com/2006/11/additives.html

[Droogie]

I can see where it easily could be inferred that I was saying that my list of manipulations is in the winemaking. But, as I also stated, I was also referring to work in the vineyard, not just winemaking. Apologies for my clumsily worded sentence.

It is not clear to me what "absurd" means regarding use of wood chips. The issue really is cost. To obtain a light oak treatment through a short barreling may be unnecessarily costly both in terms of the labor involved and the barrel usage, while achieving no more effect than wood chips.

Actually, my reference to the Australians is that they are on the forefront of the science of winemaking to which, I presume, this thread is generally opposed.