I've observed a disturbing trend in California wines. I'm not referring to the mass produced, homogenized stuff that Mike et al rail against. This is different.
There are a number of small producers who insist on the "minimalist" approach to winemaking. Frankly, I'm among them - within reason. I feel that the less a winemaker has to "handle" the wine, the less damage he will do to it. For that reason, it has been my custom to never rack my wines until just before bottling. IOW juice goes into barrel, ferments, rests on its lees for a year or more, and at that time is racked to a tank for fining (and filtration, if necessary) prior to bottling.
There are, however, a number of wineries who carry this to what I consider to be a ridiculous extreme.
I recently purchased a bottle of Pinot Noir from an appellation I've been interested in for awhile. I'd never tasted any wines from this producer before, but I had high hopes. I opened it and poured a glass, only to find it cloudy. I thought to myself, "That's odd. A wine this young shouldn't have thrown any sediment yet." Then I tasted it and became outraged that I had paid ~$20US for a bottle of wine that should rightly still be aging in a barrel with its brothers. IOW, I had bought an expensive barrel sample!
This is a new twist on half-assed winemaking IMO. Not only was the wine insufficiently barrel aged, it was also unfined and unfiltered - and it desperately needed at _least_ two of those three!
I realize that the airy-fairy, hippie-dippie approach will always appeal to _some_ - but I find it rather insulting - especially for the price of good wines made in a truly artisanal fashion.
OK, I'm done venting. :^]
Tom S