This and That.

I am quite on board with the three preceding comments but would like to clear a possible misunderstanding contained within the understanding of my understanding: the suspicion of chaptalization was not based on a belief that I can distinguish between unchaptalized and judiciously chaptalized, but on a premise that prolonged fermentations (that would, afaik, result from even judicious chaptalization) might compromise the structural delicacy associated with the variety.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I am quite on board with the three preceding comments but would like to clear a possible misunderstanding contained within the understanding of my understanding: the suspicion of chaptalization was not based on a belief that I can distinguish between unchaptalized and judiciously chaptalized, but on a premise that prolonged fermentations (that would, afaik, result from even judicious chaptalization) might compromise the structural delicacy associated with the variety.
Click to expand...
An interesting comment given that many great estates such as Romanée-Conti, Leroy, and Dujac habitually chaptalize a half a degree or so specifically for the purpose of prolonging fermentation.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I am quite on board with the three preceding comments but would like to clear a possible misunderstanding contained within the understanding of my understanding: the suspicion of chaptalization was not based on a belief that I can distinguish between unchaptalized and judiciously chaptalized, but on a premise that prolonged fermentations (that would, afaik, result from even judicious chaptalization) might compromise the structural delicacy associated with the variety.
Click to expand...
An interesting comment given that many great estates such as Romanée-Conti, Leroy, and Dujac habitually chaptalize a half a degree or so specifically for the purpose of prolonging fermentation.
Click to expand...
They know what their wee beasties produce, and when!
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I am quite on board with the three preceding comments but would like to clear a possible misunderstanding contained within the understanding of my understanding: the suspicion of chaptalization was not based on a belief that I can distinguish between unchaptalized and judiciously chaptalized, but on a premise that prolonged fermentations (that would, afaik, result from even judicious chaptalization) might compromise the structural delicacy associated with the variety.
Click to expand...
An interesting comment given that many great estates such as Romanée-Conti, Leroy, and Dujac habitually chaptalize a half a degree or so specifically for the purpose of prolonging fermentation.
Click to expand...

To allow for all that I don't know about the effects of judicious chaptalization, I used might instead of will. In any case, the effects of this extra half degree, coupled with the nfo, adds a degree of structure that, with lesser material, may taste like a miscalculation.
 
I'd much sooner have an 11.5% natural chaptalized to 13% or even 13.5% (2% used to be the legal limit, but I have in the back of my mind that a producer told me a few years ago that it had been reduced to 1.5%) than a 14% or above unchaptalized.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I am quite on board with the three preceding comments but would like to clear a possible misunderstanding contained within the understanding of my understanding: the suspicion of chaptalization was not based on a belief that I can distinguish between unchaptalized and judiciously chaptalized, but on a premise that prolonged fermentations (that would, afaik, result from even judicious chaptalization) might compromise the structural delicacy associated with the variety.
Click to expand...
An interesting comment given that many great estates such as Romanée-Conti, Leroy, and Dujac habitually chaptalize a half a degree or so specifically for the purpose of prolonging fermentation.
Click to expand...

Exactly that, a perfectly normal procedure though I imagine the new-school 'natural' producers eschew it.
 
Per The Wine Spectator...

In the United States, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) regulates wine labels. The TTB rules state that for wines containing 14 percent or less alcohol by volume (ABV), the actual alcohol content can vary by plus or minus 1.5 percentage points. So, a wine labeled as containing 12 percent ABV could range from 10.5 percent to 13.5 percent.

For wines above 14 percent, the permitted variance is plus or minus 1 percentage point. Wineries are also permitted to state a range on their labels. For wines at 14 percent or less, the range can be up to 3 percentage points. For wines over 14 percent, the range can be up to 2 percentage points.

Of course, labeling requirements differ in other parts of the world. The European Union, for instance, requires that the “actual alcoholic strength” be printed on wine labels. That ABV must be accurate within 0.5 percent. (The E.U. allows a slightly higher variance of 0.8 percent for sparkling wines and wines that are bottle aged for at least three years before release.) ... PP.. . . . . . Pete
 
Pete,
SADLY - makes me think I should explain.
Winemaking is not an exact science. Sure, there are people who will simply ignore the rules, as there always are in any biz. But there are those who allow nature/nurture to take its course and wind up with something that does not quite meet the measuring stick. And for a time there, it was not just a matter of real vs. stated alcohol but also a matter of when the tax rate changed based upon abv.
So folks fudge. I know of several occasions where the label and reality were not in concert; some were intentional, some were not.

Like most things in winemaking, the guy/gal in charge does what works to make the best wine possible. Most of the time it is exactly what is expected - but not always.

My point here is that the political limits placed upon the process are not always what works the best. And if the penalty for doing what one thinks makes the best wine is small, one does what is best.
Sometimes you do it even when the penalty is not small.

No judgment here; wineries are not about arbitrary rules - they are about making the best possible wine.
At least, that was my experience.
 
Damiano Ciolli 2024 Olevano Romano "Silene" - 13.5%, cesanese, raised in concrete and aged in the bottle, this is rather intense for a lightweight red, more earth and less metal-y flavors than other cesanese I've had; I rather like this

Bod. Bhilar 2020 Rioja "Phincas" - 80% tempranillo, 15% graciano, 5% viura, biodynamic, incredibly dark! big, bold, zinberry, great acidity, I'm waiting a couple days to drink the second half of the bottle- maybe it will open up even more
 
originally posted by Peter Creasey:
Per The Wine Spectator...

In the United States, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) regulates wine labels. The TTB rules state that for wines containing 14 percent or less alcohol by volume (ABV), the actual alcohol content can vary by plus or minus 1.5 percentage points. So, a wine labeled as containing 12 percent ABV could range from 10.5 percent to 13.5 percent.

For wines above 14 percent, the permitted variance is plus or minus 1 percentage point. Wineries are also permitted to state a range on their labels. For wines at 14 percent or less, the range can be up to 3 percentage points. For wines over 14 percent, the range can be up to 2 percentage points.

Of course, labeling requirements differ in other parts of the world. The European Union, for instance, requires that the “actual alcoholic strength” be printed on wine labels. That ABV must be accurate within 0.5 percent. (The E.U. allows a slightly higher variance of 0.8 percent for sparkling wines and wines that are bottle aged for at least three years before release.) ... PP.. . . . . . Pete
Click to expand...

This is irrelevant to the discussion. Claude was talking about how much % increase in abv through chaptalization is legal, whether it's up to 1.5% or 2.0%, nothing to do with the degree of accuracy required in wine labels.
 
originally posted by Florida Jim: Pete, SADLY - makes me think I should explain. Winemaking is not an exact science. Sure, there are people who will simply ignore the rules, as there always are in any biz.
Click to expand...

Jim, SADLY, Food & Wine says, "Each year, the TTB conducts an alcohol beverage sampling program, where both random wines and risk-based samples are tested. Typically, this includes testing a few hundred products. Non-compliance rates are high, even with the allowable wiggle room. One recent assessment put violators at 20%, while another had the rate at 26%." ... PP .. . . . . . Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top