Wine made with "powders"

"Michael Nielsen" wrote ......................

Michael, let me preface this commentary by saying, firstly I am NOT a winemaker, oenologist nor viticulturist - and my interest nowadays in purely in (a great reduced) consumption.

Secondly, I do not know of this producer (I am familiar, however, with the wines and practices of this region).

Having been raised on a small dairy farm, the subject(s) of growing practices, biodynamic and organic, have been of interest to me for some time.

However, vineyard practices have little or nothing to do with additives used during the winemaking process.

Without wanting to start an argument (but in the interests of informed discussion) there is no such thing as "biodynamic wine" or "organic wine" - more correctly, these wines could be titled "wines made from grapes grown biodynamically" or "organically".

Many producers are making, marketing and promoting as 'natural wines".

These wines must:

• be made from organically grown grapes; * be hand harvested; * be rushed to the winery without the use of metabisulfite during harvesting; * be fermented on wild yeasts; * may not re-use pomace * and must contain very low levels of sulfite (or none at all).

"Conventional" winemaking may use: mechanical harvesting; innoculation with commercial yeasts; re-use of pomace (think wines made with the "ripasso method"); reverse osmosis; use of ion exchange resins, acacia gum, oak chips and fining agents and addition of sulfites, acid and sugars (as permitted in some countries), tannins and other agents to correct colour, acid, PH levels and winemaking faults.

I have perused the website of Crociani - they make no claims as to viticultural methods, although I do know that others in the Montepulciano area are "converting" to biodynamic and organic growing (Avignonesi).

In her "Oxford Companion to Wine" my friend Jancis Robinson sates "“It would be impossible to produce an entirely sulfur-free wine since a small amount of sulfur dioxide is one of the by-products of the metabolic reaction of yeast during fermentation.”

Even if Crociani was already (they make no claims to being so), or were in the process of becoming an organic winery, applying biodynamics in the vineyard, while they would be committed to using as little sulfites in their wines as possible. European regulations do permit its use.

According to their web-site, they do hand-harvest. I am making the assumption that they macerate the grapes to stimulate the wild yeasts present, but I would be very surprised if, like many winemakers, they did not from time to time innoculate with other selected yeasts?" (Note: these are "powdered, freeze dried products which would be accompanied by powdered nutrients).

Every winemaker, at some time or another, has had to deal with grapes with less than the ideal PH or acid levels. The use of various salts or chalk is frequently used to correct these imbalances.

In less than ideal vintages, I would be surprised indeed if their winemaker did not use every trick in his winemaking arsenal to turn grapes into $$$$ (or Euros) by the addition or use of any permitted material, powdered or otherwise.

On the subject as you have raised " the use of powders ...... to adjust the flavours ... to make bad wine drinkable", again, from experience, I have been there when winemakers used a variety of "permitted materials" (copper sulphate being one) to correct faults in wine - not so much to make "bad wine drinkable" but to remedy faults in the process so that grapes from a very poor harvest were able to made into "something marketable" out of commercial necessity.

I have never experienced a smaller "artisan or boutique" type producer resort to these techniques to attempt to pass off an inferior wine as a premium product.

Michael Nielsen wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

A wine priced at 17 euro is a premium wine by all standards. The idea of a wine been made with the help of powders is confusing. Does it mean that the wine was made with some powders to which water is added (a la "Tang")? I do not think this is possible.

Now, wine is a product of human intervention. From the vineyard to the bottle, there is a lot of human intervention or wine is not possible. Vines have to be managed, pruned, kept free from diseases (mildiu, oidium...), canopy has to be managed and sometimes that implies de- leafing. Production quantities have to be managed too in order to get a balance between alcoholic and physiological ripeness at the day of harvest.

Some of these interventions require "powders" and some of them are even considered acceptable by organic and biodinamic certification agencies. After all, when you make a tisane with camomile you are using some sort of "powder". Same when you use copper sulphate (as said by sthelier).

And, in the winery, there are many other ways to the intervention, from the use of fermentation starters, to cultures of yeasts (that actually can impart a flavor profile) to the use of oak barrels to impart some flavor and structure to the wines.

There are some wineries aiming to lower-end wines still in the premium category (which is every wine above 3-5 euro / bottle) that use "powders" like citric or tartaric acid to balance an over-ripe wine, liquid tanin to save some money in barrels, or oak chips. Even oak sawdust which impart the oak flavor very quickly at a very low cost. Some wineries even chaptalize their wines when they do not get enough ripeness (and use sugar, another powder) or as part of their production process (eg Champagne).

The only wine category in which I think that there are no-powders is the natural wine category, which is quite fashionable nowadays in some circles. You know what they say about those wines (I am tongue in cheek here): "Natural wines, red or white, all of them a variety of orange".

Good wineries prefer to make the best possible work at the vineyard, substituting treatments with pesticides or herbicides by work at the vineyard, getting a good balance of alcoholic/physiological ripeness in the fruit so that no corrections are needed, employing the native yeasts naturally present in the grape skins and therefore not using fermentation starters or cultured yeasts, and for sure not correcting acidity or chaptalizing. Oak barrels will be the choice over chips or sawdust to impart structure. But most of them will employ a bit of sulphur at bottling time or wine would oxidize very quickly.

If this concept interests you, I suggest that you look for wines made within the certification standards of Organic / Ecologic / Biodynamic. There are also many wineries doing these type of wines without certifications but you should get to know the winery, visit it, walk the vineyards and learn about them.

Er, also in the interests of informed discussion, in the nicest possible way I need to tell you that you are are wrong :)

As far as I know there has been biodynamic wine for a long time. Here is the relevant statement from Demeter, with the standard that covers wine production:

Regarding organic wine, you are probably thinking of old EU definitions. It used to be the case that you could only claim that the grapes were grown organically, but this changed a couple of years ago. And elsewhere in the world, including the USA, there have been official definitions of organic wine for a longer time:

Steve, thank you for these links - very interesting reading (particularly the one in respect to "biodynamic wine")

Perusing the list of "permitted additives" and practises, I wonder why they bother !!!

Great - biodynamically (certified) grown grapes, but then a myriad of compromises. Permitted are -

• Machine harvesting

• Use of plastic to transfer material (wine, juice)

• Addition of sugar (even non-certified)

• Addition of water to mash / must !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• Use of bought in yeast (in some cases)

• Use of SO2

• Use of acidity regulators

• Use of non-certified and non-organic fining agents.

Here in NZ these are several producers who grow using biodynamic principals.

However, they do not use the expression "Biodynamic Wine" or "Organic Wine".

They chose to label their wines "Wine from certified biodynamic or certified organic grapes"

To me, so called "Biodynamic wines" are made from grapes grown using the principles of biodynamic viticulture.

As "santiago" has stated - once in the winery human intervention takes over.

To me, the "standards" are no more than a compromise to allow wines to be called "biodynamic" - as a marketing gimmick, and I am surprised that the Demeter organisation has allowed these compromises.

Initially, I thought that the whole principal of biodynamic farming was in the realms of fantasy.

But, I do know several people growing fruit and vegetables - and dairy farmers and they have made me reconsider my stance.

But, the fruits and raw milk are not compromised in any way.

Well, part of the problem is that the Demeter organization is charging a lo t US$10,000 to certify as biodynamic. That is a lot of cash. I have no issu e with biodynamic practices. They seem to be good farming with some mystica l BS thrown in but I have yet to see it improve wine quality and that is my bottom line as long as vineyard practices are good environmentally.

made him his favourite osso buco. Crociani Vino Nobile di Montepulciano Ri serva. He explained that it was special because it was hand made without th e use of powders that people sadly use to adjust the flavours nowadays to m ake bad wine drinkable.

way and that anything that is natively 10$+ is "special" according to his definition (by natively I mean the winery reference price, not a crazy impo rt-taxed price).

No time to go into details of the responses atm but would like to clarify " powders":

- Not talking about the trekking wine powder :)

- Not talking biodynamic/organic.

- I have had organic wines in california without sulfites. they were horrib le. Just fruit juice. Ive had organic wines that tasted just like normal wi ne, and they had sulfites haha. And some say that they are at the wineries even though they don't have certification.

- The Crociani has sulfites in it (thank godness!)

- It is the modifications of the taste profile in the must that was the top ic. sugars, acids, etc. I would have thought that premium wines would displ ay the true nature of the grapes as they were that vintage- no modification ? But what I get from the replies is that it isnt so?

I made him his favourite osso buco. Crociani Vino Nobile di Montepulciano Riserva. He explained that it was special because it was hand made without the use of powders that people sadly use to adjust the flavours nowadays to make bad wine drinkable.

at way and that anything that is natively 10$+ is "special" according to hi s definition (by natively I mean the winery reference price, not a crazy im port-taxed price).

vintages 2009.

ible. Just fruit juice. Ive had organic wines that tasted just like normal wine, and they had sulfites haha. And some say that they are at the winerie s even though they don't have certification.

opic. sugars, acids, etc. I would have thought that premium wines would dis play the true nature of the grapes as they were that vintage- no modificati on? But what I get from the replies is that it isnt so?

I'm just a bit confused where you are going with this line of reasoning. By powders, to what exactly are you referring. Sugar, acid, sulfur, non-nativ e yeasts, or wine flavored powder. Do vintners manipulate wine nowadays. Fo r some, yes they do. Reverse osmosis to remove alcohol is certainly a manip ulation that would not violate organic rules though. All wine making is mod ification unless you go back to the way it was done originally to simply pr ess the grapes, add water and stick it in an amphora in the ground. Outside of Croatia, don't know too many vintners making wine that way.

By powders, to what exactly are you referring. Sugar, acid, sulfur, non-nat ive yeasts, or wine flavored powder. Do vintners manipulate wine nowadays. For some, yes they do. Reverse osmosis to remove alcohol is certainly a man ipulation that would not violate organic rules though. All wine making is m odification unless you go back to the way it was done originally to simply press the grapes, add water and stick it in an amphora in the ground. Outsi de of Croatia, don't know too many vintners making wine that way.

So in conclusion the crociani wine is special in not having been modified w ith adding powders such as acid and sugar. Pingus, chateau latour and roths hild, 1000$+ burgundies use powders?

Allowed is not the same as used. Most winemakers are a bit coy about what they do. I know of one who claims not to use sulfites, but of course his wines have sulfites, he just gets away with the naturally occurring ones. Oak chip bags immersed in wine impart exactly the same chemical changes to wine as oak barrels just not as elegantly and usually overly so. A wine is bad to me because it is overly oaked. Whether by bag or barrel is of little concern other than as to price.

Michael Nielsen wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

We should ask the winemaker about that. Who knows.

I doubt Pingus, Chateau Latour and Lafite or Mouton use powders. They probably use selection of the best lots to bottle under their Grand Vin and declassify other lots. Or sell them in bulk.

Some time ago, it was not uncommon that wines were chaptalized almost every vintage in Bordeaux and, for the record, this is still rather common practice in Burgundy nowadays.

In Spain you do not find much chaptalization (sugar) but you find quite some acidification. Different terroirs... different unbalances.

Given the vast array of additives available the term "powders" could mean just about anything but for whatever reason I assumed he meant tannin powder since it is an agent that is fairly commonly used to adjust tannin levels and flavor profiles.

just about anything but for whatever reason I assumed he meant tannin powd er since it is an agent that is fairly commonly used to adjust tannin level s and flavor profiles.

The origin of the word "powders" is someone at Crociani winery that told my father in law (in italian) , who then told me, with my wife translating di rectly from italian to english: "their wines are special because they are n ot made with powders, as sadly is the case nowadays". My reply was that I c ertainly hope they do add sulfites, as sulfite free wine is horrible. and t he bottle did say "contains sulfites". The father mentioned as an example s ugar as a powder that might be added at other wineries.

As others have said, many wines are Chaptalized by the addition of sugar and many others are acidifed by the addition of tartrate. Both of those are established practices that go back generations and correct for weather-related problems (not sunny or hot enough or too hot, respectively). In cheaper, mass-produced wines you can find the addition of tannin powder to give wines more structure than nature has endowed them with.

Beyond the addition of powders, though, you have many other manipulations that have become commonplace in many wine regions. Reverse osmosis and spinning cone technologies are used to lower the alcohol levels in (over)ripe wines, MegaPurple and pectinase are added to the must to increase extraction in red wines and designer yeasts are chosen to impart certain flavors in the fermentation. As Joseph Coulter mentioned, oak chips or oak dust are added to wines in lieu of barrel aging to impart "new oak" flavors for a fraction of the price of a new barrel. There is even a company in California, Vinovations, that will analyze your wine, identify which manipulations are needed to fit a desired "flavor profile" and then perform said manipulations to transform your wine into whatever you set as your target.

As Joseph also said, winemakers are very coy about revealing what goes on in their cellars. Right now, Paul Draper of Ridge is arguing for a law that would require wineries to list the ingredients in their wines, a move that's being fiercely resisted by many wineries. Should that happen, you'll see many winery practices change very rapidly, as the image of peasants stomping grapes with their feet still sells a lot of wine in the US.

Mark Lipton (jaded consumer)

It is said that you used to see pallets of sacs behind the wineries in France. As you drove from north to south, the writing on the sacs would change, from beet sugar to tartaric acid.

Adding sugar to the must is called chaptalisation, and it was certainly more than common practice in (e.g) Bordeaux. I don't know what the current status is, but as yields are often quite high chaptalisation is done to bring up the alcohol levels even by the most prestigious names, for example

-E

On 30/08/2014 23:24, Steve Slatcher wrote:> On 30/08/2014 04:08, st.helier wrote: > > > Without wanting to start an argument (but in the interests of informed > > discussion) there is no such thing as "biodynamic wine" or "organic > > wine" - more correctly, these wines could be titled "wines made from > > grapes grown biodynamically" or "organically". > > Er, also in the interests of informed discussion, in the nicest possible > way I need to tell you that you are are wrong :) > > As far as I know there has been biodynamic wine for a long time. Here > is the relevant statement from Demeter, with the standard that covers > wine production: >

I recently dug the EU "organic wine regs" out of the Web in another context, so thought I'd post the link here for the record...

Steve