Comments on: When Is a Wine Considered ‘Manipulated’?!?

By: Barret Hudson

Barret Hudson — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:31:06 +0000

I think it is the final product that matters, and that if you know what to look for you will be able to tell if a wine has been significantly played with. In my experiences at a winery, tasting before and after any kind of doctoring of wine always revealed some change in taste characteristics. Super Purple, while it may be hard to define, definitely has a taste and if you talk to people who have worked with it a lot they can almost always tell when a wine has it in it.
The same holds true for other procedures I encountered as well. One winemaker I knew used to play a game trying to figure out what had been done to the wines from other wineries in the region. Sense he knew most of the other winemakers he was able to check his guesses with them, and he was able to guess a good portion of the time, and without fail if he said there was something done to the wine, even if he didn’t get the specific treatment rite, the wine had been doctored in some way.
This is granted a somewhat skewed opinion, as not everyone will be able to do like a winemaker and taste before and after treatments etc. However, I think it does point out that, everything you do to a wine gets reflected in the final product. This includes what you put on the vineyards, what is in the air in your vineyards (go try wine from a winery where the vines are next to a road that was being paved during the summer and fall), what you do pre/during/post fermentation, how the wine is aged, all of this has effects on the over all quality and flavor profile of the wine. What matters is finding wines that you enjoy drinking, maybe that is bio-dynamic wines that have very minimal treatments done to them, or maybe you love the taste of super purpled, sugared up, tannin infused (yes this really happens), lab production wines, or perhaps, like most consumers, you fall somewhere in between. What matters is enjoying what you drink.

By: Bob Heuman

Bob Heuman — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:33:59 +0000

A: when you add sugar or acid, or any flavorings (not that any winemaker would ever do those things;-)

By: Jason Meltzer

Jason Meltzer — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:32:12 +0000

My point was that it doesn’t matter if you can tell if it was manipulated… but the more it is, the worse the final product, which is all that matters.

Maybe one day I’ll try a “fake” wine that tastes better than it’s more natural counterpart, but that hasn’t happened yet!

By: Fermented Thoughts

Fermented Thoughts — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:53:01 +0000

A) Yes, it is the final product that matters but, hopefully not at the cost of the “anything it takes” method. The juice will indeed be judged by the consumer and the market on its merits (taste & cost) first then, how it is made. How much you choose to shape the wine along the way and how is the difference.

B)No. Depending on the goal and your taste, winemaking can be an “industry” or an “art” and some methods should be left to the winemaker alone. That said, and in line with the French that began the practice, laws ensuring quality and production methods should be used for those wishing to bottle under a given regional or varietal name.

But hey, remember in the end – it’s fermented grape juice!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:58:46 +0000

Jason,

Good synopsis – but I’m not sure I agree with your conclusion.

I have had some pretty darned manipulated wines – micro ox, oak chips, spinning cones, color additives – and one truly would never know on the surface unless the winemaker/winery let you in on their little ‘secrets’ . . .

Can winemakers taste a wine and know if it’s been ‘spoofilated’? In some cases, yes – a late acid add will oftentimes stand out; a wine that is ‘so concentrated’ that it is more so than most others; a pinot noir from the Central Valley that is as dark as a cab (but this could just be due to the wonderful rule that allows you to add up to 25% of ANY variety to whatever one your put on your label). . .

I hope to keep this conversation going because I feel there are many that have much more knowledge than myself – and I can’t wait to hear from them (-:

Cheers!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:53:56 +0000

Jesse,

Thanks for the kind comments – much appreciated.

Scent additives, eh?!?!?!? Well . . . . these truly are not allowed and completely illegal, right?!?!?! Okay, but you CAN purchase ‘liquid oak alternatives’ that can provide a ‘mocha’ effect to the wine, including increasing the aromatics along those lines . . .

As far as vanillin goes, just use 200% new American oak – that will get you what you want!

Liquid smoke? See above . . . or there are specific barrel coopers whose barrels are known more for their ‘smoky’ quality than others . . .

Good questions – and one hopefully others even more knowledgable than me will jump in on and discuss!

Cheers!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:48:24 +0000

Dave,

Great comments . . .

My main comment is that you assume things at the beginning of your post that I’m not sure you should . . . I think wineries have become quite adept at ‘implying’ things take place whether or not they do . . .

And a winery can say ‘natural yeasts’ or ‘native yeasts’ and still innoculate with commercial yeasts – short of ‘false advertising’ I’m not sure what rules or laws they are breaking . . .

The same goes for filtration. You may assume that since a winery does not state that they filter that the defacto answer is that they do not . . . and many wineries want you to believe this for ‘unfiltered wines are better’, according to ‘conventional wisdom’ . . . (-:

We’ll see how forthright wineries are in the future – especially if and when the FDA gets involved!

Cheers!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:43:38 +0000

Arthur,

Very true . . . and if I had more of a following right now, perhaps I could ‘poll’ folks . . .

The problem with that would be that the cross section of folks that actually happen to find my happy little spot is not necessarily a microcosm for the true wine drinking world out there . . .

I’ll just continue to ask the questions and let’s see what answers those of you ‘in the know’ come back with (-:

Cheers!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:41:30 +0000

Larry,

Love the James Ontivaros quote – classic!

To me, you hit the nail on the head . . . wineries SHOULD be more forthcoming, but there is no incentive to do so . . . In fact, there is more ‘disincentive’ due to ‘image’ and ‘brand building’ at this point . .. Why be forthright if we don’t need to be, eh?!?!?

And this leads into the other question – does the end justify the means?!?!? Does the consumer really care as long as the final product is enjoyable?!?!?

More food for thought . . .

Cheers!

By: larry schaffer

larry schaffer — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:38:41 +0000

John,

Thanks for the comments – very much appreciated!

I concur with your thoughts . . . but what if a winery’s ‘proprietary method’ involves some very manipulative ‘tricks of the trade’ – is that cool?!?!?

Cheers!