Ironic isn't it?...Wineries and juice concentrate

Dave,

I agree that it's ironic and I feel that on one level it's a shame too.

While one part of me wants to make the best wine possible, another part of me feels that over orchestrating the outcome by technology robs the wine of some of its romance & mystique. I would hate for every wine, weather commercial or my own, to be a uniform product and no more unique an experience than a bottle of catsup. The variations among handcrafted items has always appealed to me. Understand, though, that this opinion comes from a lowly amateur who doesn't have to make his living on the public's acceptance of his output. I guess it has to do with the motivation behind the process, and whether one perceives the history of the wine as part of its attraction. Really, what they're doing is not very different from various Icewine or Reccioto(?) techniques, but those somehow seem more "harmonious" or "elegant" to me.

BTW, Most, if not almost all kit wine concentrators use considerable heat in the process, and this results in the formation of hydroxymethylfurfural, which gives the wines a caramel like taste that many people find common to kit wines. The processes you describe wouldn't have that drawback, as HMF only forms at temps over 50°C.

Thanks for the post.

Mike MTM

That's EXACTLY what he talks about in the book. He spends quite a few pages on how every wine is beginning to taste the same (like an oak plank). By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great experiment. Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because they ALL taste the same. What a shame.

The variations among handcrafted

uh, yep.....me too.

You're welcome

Dave Stacy

SNIP

Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because

Agreed. I've noticed that quite a few non-Cab S. wines are strongly reminiscent of Cab S, and I don't think it's just a stylistic similarity. I suspect that many Merlots, Cab Francs, even F A hybrids like Chambourcin, have a fair amount of Cab S. blended in, and it robs them of their varietal distinctions. I go out of my way to try unfamiliar varities, and too many seem to be Cab S wannabees.

More's the pity.

Mike MTM

It's not quite the same. There's no heat involved in the process. Also, the degree of concentration is nowhere near the same as in the manufacture of a kit wine.

Tom S

If I can believe what I've read in the last couple of years, most of the kit manufacturers have moved as far away as possible from heating their juices and are using vacuum methods (and maybe other things I don't recall) to concentrate their juices.

As for the point of the original poster... It is quite interesting and not entirely surprising. But it's worth noting that the amount of concentration involved in producing typical kits (even the "premium"

Also, don't the kit manufacturers also do something to the must to basically sterilize it to prevent spoilage? The wineries presumably would not require this, assuming that they are fermenting it soon after pressing and concentration.

It is interesting though... Thanks for the information!

Cheers,

Richard

Many of the cheap bulk wines are made from concentrates. It alleviates storage space. Wine is then made as needed. Tim

So you can imagine what the kit manufacturers are doing then. There's no rules at all with kits. I just finished a Riesling kit which seemed to make OK wine except it doesn't taste anything like a Riesling, seems more like a Chardonnay to my very untrained palate.

Don

No way. You set (for example) a good Pinot Noir, a good Cabernet and a good Syrah in front of me and I will be able to find the two that match. I'll even be able to tell you which is which (most of the time anyway).

There is a lot of indistinct wine out there and a lot of those end up in your local restaurant for BtG pours, but the good wines keep their varietal characteristics even if reverse osmosis is used.

Andy

Andy, You might enjoy looking at the following paper. It describes an experiment where a trained panel blind tasted and attempted to identify several 1972 and 1973 varietal wines.

Here are some of the results for 1973 vintage wines ...... Muscat (76% correct identifications), Riesling (34%), Colombard (26%), Chardonnay (26%), Sauvignon Blanc (18%), Gewürztraminer (6%), Cabernet Sauvignon (39%), Petite Sirah (32%), Pinot Noir (32%), Zinfandel (31%), Merlot (11%).

In all, fifteen white wines and eleven red wines were tasted, so the probability of just guessing correctly would be about 1 in 15 (7%) for the white wines and 1 in 11 (9%) for the red wines. Surprising results, especially since the tasting was done by a _trained_ panel.

Winton, W. Ough, C.S. and Singleton, V.L. - "Relative distinctiveness of varietal wines estimated by the ability of trained panelists to name the grape variety correctly" - Am. L. Enol. Vit. 26 (1975) 5.

Ah, but you're not giving yourself a challenge! Try it with a group of Bordeaux varities, like a merlot, a cab franc, and a cab sauv. Or to make the original poster's point, 3 cab sauvs.

Dave

Jep,

Generally speaking, I strongly agree with you and disagree with Dave. However, it depends on what the bartender or restaurant owner chooses! I find that the better restaurants tend to have a wine list with plenty of variation, but occasionally I come across a middle-of-the-road restaurant where the list of reds has little variation, and where there is (like a mixture of Shiraz, Cab Sauv, etc) the wines chosen all have a lot of common qualities. It seems to me in those cases that whomever is chosing the wines to put on the list has a fairly narrow range of preference or experience. In such a place I would bet my success would be in line with what Dave is suggesting. But with what you described (even with "half-decent" wines let alone "good" ones) I would confidently bet that I could pick out which is which -- assuming that the wines chosen weren't particularly atypical examples of the variety chosen especially to foil such an experiment...

Cheers, Richard

Man you guys have much better palettes than I do! There is no way I'd get it right. Guess I better stick to the cheap stuff.

Dave Stacy

You may be right that many wines may have Cab s. blended in, but in the US at least, if a wine is labeled as a vinifera varietal it must have at least 75% of that variety grape in the bottle. For some of the non-vinifera varieties such as Concord the requirement is only 51%. Not sure about the hybrids.

Miker

I doubt it is available online. But, the Journal of Enology and Viticulture should be available a most large libraries or you could order a reprint from UC Davis.

I don't really see this as the same thing as the kits.

I agree that in removing some water the wineries are using technology to manipulate the product, and part of me feels this is a shame, but part of me feels that if the result is good, then why complain. I do think it would be a shame if all wineries did this, because I would not want to find that the 'natural' product is not available.

However, from the description given above, these wineries are removing some of the water to make a more concentrated or full bodied wine. They are not then adding tap water to dilute it back to its supposed natural concentration, as is done with the kits. Is something important lost when some water is removed? I don't know. Is the tap water that I add to my kits the same as the water that was removed? No.

I wonder if these machines are being used to remove some water to get a better product if there is a wet season. I'm no expert, but I think I've read that if the late season is wet, the grape juice will contain less sugar. If the grapes are in effect, bloated with more water, removing some of it may salvage a harvest that might not produce a viable wine. I'm only speculating.

Miker,

Yes, I'm aware of the 25% regulation (here) in the US. But even 25% of the "savage grape" can be a lot when it comes to blends. I'm sure the various wines I've noticed this in are at or below the limit, but I still sometimes find it obtrusive in a variety which is ordinarily quite different from Cab S. Don't get me wrong, a lot of times it adds to the blend, but other times I think the heavy handed use of such a "big", distinctive grape is more of a distraction than an asset. I've had wines, as I imagine all of us have, which were sold as Merlot or Cab Franc, and could have been passed off as a nice Cab S. Good wines, but not what I wanted when I selected the variety I did. Maybe it's just my pet peeve.

Interesting about the different rule for Concord, etc. I don't know that I was aware of it.

Enjoy Mike MTM

That's the tough thing about only being able to read comments and not hear the tone of voice... I didn't REALLY mean kits. I was trying to imply that overall it seems that the majority of active participants in this group see kits or concentrate as not in keeping with the true spirit or pure version of what wine is supposed to be. Yet here we are having commercial wineries (and dare I quote from the book, a LOT of them) removing some of the natural water from juice all the time to make a concentrated wine or full bodied wine. This would seem to not meet the standards set by the purists. I've seen comments here from cottage wineries saying that kits, concentrated juice, and sterile must isn't REAL wine. Well the bad news is that it appears that modifying juice from its natural concentration to one of a more concentrated nature is now commonplace in the commercial industry. (so far I've kept my opinion to myself but I just can't help it anymore) I think this is a shame. Why would any winery want to homogenize its wine buy intentionally over oaking it and concentrating its juice? After all isn't a cab supposed to be a "knife and fork" wine and a pinot noir supposed to be lighter and fruitier?

I'm not enough of an expert to make the judgement that this is indeed good. I'm not sure it is, but that is just some Texas schmoes's opinion. (aka me)

I do

My point EXACTLY. I'd love to know what a real pure shiraz from Aussie land tastes like. However it is apparent that all exported aussie juice is controlled by 4 companies, all of which remove natural water from their juice. Alas unless I fly down there I'll never know what it tastes like.

VERY good question! I doubt anything is lost except the taste of what the unadulterated wine would taste like. Is that important? Guess that is up to the individual.

Is the tap

According to the author (who IS an expert) this is done wet season or not. It is done EVERY season in MOST of the wine growing regions of the world since the mid 1990's.

My conclusion...... I think we'll all have a different opinion on if this a smart thing to do. However I think we can all agree that knowing how a wine from Bordeaux, California, or Australia tastes in its purest, or old world, form is going to be harder and harder to experience. I think OVER (not a little like most home makers do) oaking, while easy for the consumer to consume, doesn't let you experience the complexity of the grape. Again in the long run I think a detriment to the industry. (again that opinion comes from a good 'ol 'suthen boy who don't know 'notiin 'bout no damm wine bidness. Shooooot, you wanna know 'bout oil or cattle now we 'cn talk.)

I'm glad this post was informative for some of you. Your welcome to those who said thanks for the info. Quite a few have asked for the book name and author. Here it is.....

Hope y'all have many carboys stashed away (that's the best Texas twang this transplanted yankee can do. Please forgive me for butchering it up)

Dave Stacy

Dave, This has been an interesting thread. From one Yankee to another, I'm not so sure this is a bad idea. If the winemaker is careful about what they are doing and it improves the end product I think it makes sense to concentrate without heat.

I would not mess with high quality fruit intended for barrel aging that could be sold at $50 to $100 a bottle, but I bet this would improve a $10 bottle and that is what most people can afford for everyday use.

Barrel aging can reduce the volume 10 to 15% over a year; depending on the relative humidity most of that can be water. I'm not saying adding chips or oak inserts and concentrating without heat will give the same result as true barrel aging, but if your wine growing area has no mystique to it like Bordeaux, Burgundy, Napa etc. why not do whatever you can to approximate the taste of better fruit? If the cost of doing this versus barrel aging were the same it would not make a whole lot of sense, but I really do not know the details and I doubt that is the case.

Just another opinion, everyone has one... :o)

Regards, Joe