Methode Traditionnelle !

I've only ever seen "Methode Traditionelle" on the labels of sparkling wine. Of course in France all sparkling wine is white or rose, yet you say its on red wine labels, and not even sparkling! Odd. I've never seen that. For sparkling wine it means that the wine is made to sparkle by the traditional method of a second fermentation in the bottle, (like Champagne) as opposed to the non-traditional method of carbonation, as soft drinks are made to "sparkle". French wine aged in barrels will say "en barrique" somewhere on the label.

By the way how did your wine travel? I went to France in July, the Vendee region. Its not a wine producing area but I brought back 20 -30 bottles of various wines, some in half cases, some single bottles. Trouble is, at least half of them were corked! I've been to France and brought back wine several times before (I live in England) and never had any thing like as many spoilt bottles. :( I wonder if there's any way I could avoid this problem? Or was it just bad luck?

Steve

Salut/Hi DJ,

le/on Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:58:20 +0100, tu disais/you said:-

One of my favourite areas!

Don't have a clue - seriously. I know this sounds truly ludicrous, because Bergerac is in fact a specialist area of mine, and I really ought to know!

My _guess_ is that this implies harvesting as early as legally possible, fairly rapid fermentation without prolonged skin contact, and moderate aging in stainless steel or concrete vats, no oak. I emphasize that this is a complete guess on my part. I know a few growers who make what they call a "cuvée traditionnelle" or similar and that's more or less what they do. (Luc de Conti for his "Cuvée Classique", Laurent de Bosredon for his Ch Bélingard. In honesty, these are the wines from Bergerac I like least, bu that is NOT meant to imply I think my taste in this is right and yours wrong.

The more expensive cuvées use prolonged skin contact for maximum extract of ultra ripe grapes, they may use micro-oxygenation and will almost certainly follow up with aging in some proportion of new oak. This tends to make wines that are less attractive when young, but with more aging potential.

Would one of them have been "Casanova de Conti", by any chance? I know that was being sold in the wine fairs by Carrefour.

As usual, "location location location". Ie, who grows it. Just as some awful muck can be found in even the most prestigious parish in Bordeaux, so it can in neighbouring Bergerac. Equally, some of the most sublime wine can be found in relatively unlikely villages. I remember the La Croix de Gravelongue that Michael Pronay introduced me to at Vinexpo. Gorgeous wine, from a village called Valayrac (who?). So in Bergerac, there are some wonderful growers making excellent wines. I would be happy to email you a list of "names" that I particularly like. (I have no financial interest in anybody in the wine world and no axe to grind).

Agreed.

Not exactly. I don´t htink I have come across a wine made sparkling by carbonation for a long time. The procedure used in some fizzy wines is the cuvée close, or cremat, which means you do the second fermentation in a steel tank. Example Moscato d´Asti.

HTH

Nils Gustaf

-- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se

^^^^^^

Sorry Nils, no. "Cremat" is a rum & coffee drink. In your case it's probably a concoction of "crémant" (= sparkling wines in France outside champagne made by methode champenoise; formerly also a half-sparkler in champagne) and "Charmat" which is the correct term for tank fermented sparklers.

M.

You are right. Too little sleep, too much coffe. Thank you for correcting me.

Cheers

Nisl Gustaf

-- Respond to nils dot lindgren at drchips dot se

Nils, I didn't know that a tank would be used to do a second fermentation, thanks for the info. Makes me wonder how the wine doesn't go "flat" during bottling. Guess they must do it quickly.

Regards Steve

More than 90 percent of all sparklers worldwide are tank fermented, I would guess.

No, the have a couter pressure bottling line (don't know whether that's the exact term, in German it's Gegendruck-Füllanlage") where the wine the sediment is filtered off in the same time.

M.

More than 90 percent of all sparklers worldwide are tank fermented, I would guess.

No, they have a couter pressure bottling line (don't know whether that's the exact term, in German it's "Gegendruck-Füllanlage") where the sediment is filtered off in the same time.

M.

More than 90 percent of all sparklers worldwide are tank fermented, I would guess.

No, they have a counter pressure bottling line (don't know whether that's the exact term, in German it's "Gegendruck-Füllanlage") where the sediment is filtered off in the same time.

M.

I am obviously not qualified to provide my own opinion, because I've only just found this out, but which method produces the better wine?

I remember visiting the Ackerman cellars in Saumur, France and being amazed at the labour-intensity of the bottle turning process. Thousands and thousands of bottles were standing in old wooden racks, and the guide was obviously proud that here was the genuine "Methode Traditionelle". I also remember the smell in the cellars, any time I drink an Ackerman Saumur sparkling wine. It's there in the wine. Delicious!

I'd suggest that the reason most winemakers use tank fermentation is cost-saving, and a compromise is made on quality.

Regards

Steve

Hi All

Interesting discussion. I can add my two cents (South African) worth: In SA, most of the high selling sparkling wines are made by carbonation. These are mostly from the House of JC le Roux, in Stellenbosch. They also make excellent MCC (Methode Cap Classique) wines. These are bottle fermented, using the Champagne method, but made in a different style. As far as I know, we only have one or two Charmat-method wines in our country. One is quite an unusual wine, in that it's a Method Charmat Noble Late Harvest. Delicious !

Just as an explanation: due to EEU objections, we are not allowed to call our Method Campenoise wines "Champagne", therefore the name "Method Cap Classique" was devised. Try some if you get the chance, it's worthwhile. I'm also convinced you'll vind it quite good value for money. As far as I know, Simonsig Estate export quite prolifically, certainly to the UK. Look out for "Kaapse Vonkel", which means "Cape Sparkle".

Well, judgment is pending. Riddlers of course state that the small vessel intensifies the contact of the lees with the wine and that this will result in better quality.

Tank fermenter otoh - especially some sitting in German viticulral schools - insist on the fact that both methods are absolutely identical, that finally a tank is nothing else than a very, very large bottle.

There is a kind of "pragmatic" truth: Tank fermented sparklers with reduced costs supply the lower end of the market, while bottle fermenters, being able to command higher prices (by law/ tradition/marketing/whatsoever reason), can afford better quality base wines, longer lee contact etc. resulting in a finer finished product.

So, unless someone takes the same base wine from champagne that goes into a regular cuvée and makes a test putting this wine into a tank for the same rather long time - up to half a decade and more for the very best -, nobody will know the outcome. Anyhow, this happens legally to be a strict no-no in Champagne.

As to medium quality base wines (viticultural schools don't normally have access to the very best) with rather short time on the lees - less than half a year in any case I've heard of -, the Germans say there's no discernible difference.

HTH to clarify a little,

M.

I agree with the Germans to a point on this matter, but if I'm not mistaken the Charmat process practitioners do not run the tank pressures anywhere near the 6 atmospheres that is attainable in Methode Traditionnelle bottles. The higher pressure, plus the longer lees contact, results in a finer mousse in the finished wine.

Tom S

One thing that I've noticed, Michael (on a very tangential point) is that larger format bottles of sparkling wine are often superior to the same wine in smaller bottles. These of course are "Methode Champenoise" or whatever it's now called, but I wonder if you've noticed the same thing and have any explanation for the phenomenon.

Mark Lipton

My experience of having the same sparkler side by side from different bottle sizes *and* sharing the same provenance from production date to the tasting (this latter point is absolutely critical) tends toward zero, I'm afraid.

All I can say is to repeat what the champenois tell us: That they consider the magnum the ideal format for their brew. This does not explain, of course, why the magnum should be better than a standard or a half bottle - I just trust their experience.

Otoh, the magnum used to the largest bottle where fermentation in the bottle was compulsory; larger formats were "transvasés", i.e. filled from standard bottles. This latter procedure inevitably results in a loss of bubbles, so this might explain why they never mentioned larger formats. Since shortly (two years or something), also larger bottles have to be fermented in the bottle, up to méthusalem (6 liter, 8 bottles), but I might err on the exact limit size. Pommery, btw, has been the only of the larger houses fermenting in and riddling larger formats (and disgorging them on demand).

My best champagne in recent times was a jéroboam (3 liter, 4 bottles) of Pommery 1985 that showed absolutely stunning and sublime in both freshness and depth of flavor.

M.

Sorry, but I don't quite see the logic of this argument: Higher pressure in any case will result in *more* bubbles, a higher intensity of the mousseux. Common wisdom has it that less pressure

- e.g. the former Crémant of Champagne or Satèn from Franciacorta

- produces finer bubbles.

M.

I'm going on the theory that the combination of higher pressure _plus_ long term concentration of the gas in solution in the presence of yeast and autolysis products tends to bind the CO2 in solution, resulting in both more effervescence and a slower release of the gas from solution - resulting in a more persistent and finer mousse.

Sound reasonable?

I can still remember a methode Champenoise from 30 years ago that seemingly

Tom S

Perfectly, thank you.

M.