Why so much syrah?

K

Kay Bixler

Kay Bixler
Why is syrah finding its way into so many non-syrah domestic wines? The holiday season affords me many opportunities to drink mass market wine and I give every one the same scrutiny I would any hipster wine and it seems all the cabernet sauvignon and pinot noir coming from the West Coast has a noticeable, even distracting, amount of syrah in the blend. Are black olives and bacon the new flavors to strive for in mass market wine? Is there a glut of cheap syrah around and people just have to use it up?

A retailer was trying to push a bottle of Castle Rock on me as a real bargain in domestic pinot noir. Except it doesn't even taste like pinot, it tastes like watered down syrah!

Thanks for any insight and sorry for the rant.

Best,
Kay
 
originally posted by Kay Bixler:
Why so much syrah? Is there a glut of cheap syrah around and people just have to use it up?

Best,
Kay
Click to expand...

While I don't know anything about blending practices this is, from what I have read, a true statement.
 
Also, in California you can label anything as varietal as long as it has 75% or more. I remember drinking some three buck chuck Chardonnay and thinking "wow, this really tastes like Sauvignon Blanc". The SB grapes Bronco gets are better than their chard, no wonder they blend it.
 
I don't find domestic syrah to taste of black olives and bacon. It has the goopy, chocolate syrup quality of hot temperature syrah (gross generalization: paste in objection about ESJ here). I expect that makes it a good blending grape for wines that sell to an audience that likes that taste.
 
There was a lot (a LOT) of syrah planted a few years back - it was going to be the Next Big Thing. Today, wines labeled "syrah" don't sell, so all that fruit has to go somewhere.

It can really round out a thin, weedy pinot noir...
 
originally posted by Hank Beckmeyer:
There was a lot (a LOT) of syrah planted a few years back - it was going to be the Next Big Thing. Today, wines labeled "syrah" don't sell, so all that fruit has to go somewhere.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much it. There were lots of articles about ten years ago of how Syrah was the next big thing and so a lot of wineries planted it, but it never took off. In fact, new world Syrah as a category is pretty much off a cliff dead. However, Rhone blends are in, so a lot of Syrah is going into those these days, as well as in other types of blends, like with Cab and certainly in Pinot, though surreptitiously with regard to Pinot.
 
My real objection here is with the cabernet sauvignon. Where there actually should be a little weediness instead I find bacon. It ruins the whole wine. Even if it was crappy wine to begin with at least it could be true to the crappy grape named on the label.
 
Coincidentally, m. jbonne just covered some cali rhone blends:

Loading…

www.sfgate.com

But more to the question, what FlaJim said. I suspect people started to realize there was little to appreciate in a trophy syrah that couldn't be had in a cheap, industrial shiraz. Why pay $25+, often $50+, for a beverage that you can buy with a cute critter on it for under $20?
 
But my point is it shouldn't be sold off as cabernet instead!

Why not blend it with grenache, come up with an easy to pronounce name and put a manatee on the label? Or make rose, anything, just stop blending it with cabernet sauvignon.
 
I had no idea the syrah bubble had burst. Thanks for the interesting info.

Kay, you like weediness in cabernet because you have not discovered the Joy of Froot.
 
originally posted by Kay Bixler:
But my point is it shouldn't be sold off as cabernet instead!

Why not blend it with grenache, come up with an easy to pronounce name and put a manatee on the label? Or make rose, anything, just stop blending it with cabernet sauvignon.
Click to expand...

Because most people won't notice and it's cheaper to manufacture?
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
I had no idea the syrah bubble had burst. Thanks for the interesting info.

Kay, you like weediness in cabernet because you have not discovered the Joy of Froot.
Click to expand...

The Joy of Froot, bubbles and Shiraz -- all in one:

Loading…

www.epicureanwines.com
 
There are commercial yeasts and enzymes and whatever (as well as barrels) marketed to wineries for the purpose of introducing the bacon taste - I doubt they need to blend in syrah to get there. It might be a common practice in industrial wines if the grapes are cheap, but I'd be surprised to learn of any syrah additions to high-end spoof wines like those $50+ Santa Rita Hills pinots, whose makers genuinely believe that they are revealing the true essence of pinot noir.
 
So is the problem that some winemakers spend too much time chasing trends, or that they don't know how to market syrah, or that they just haven't grafted the vines over to the next great thing, or that the gov't's 75% rule is, well, not in the consumer's best interest, or that there just isn't enough grenache floating around to mix all of that syrah with for a proper Rhone blend, or maybe varietal labelling isn't all it's cranked up to be?

Or, most likely, a mediocre cab is still mediocre when you put syrah in it?

The Bordelais change the blend when they want and never change the label. But then they're not using syrah. In Burgundy they used to use Rhone varieties but had the good sense not to admit it.

Or maybe syrah is just an invasive species - it's in California, and the southern Rhone, hiding under an assumed name down under, etc., etc., ...

If I thought my cab producer was putting syrah in it surreptitiously - not to make a better wine, but to turn some otherwise unsaleable inventory at my expense - I think I'd go looking for a new producer.
 
originally posted by Chris Weber:
If I thought my cab producer was putting syrah in it surreptitiously - not to make a better wine, but to turn some otherwise unsaleable inventory at my expense - I think I'd go looking for a new producer.
Click to expand...

Chris,
First of all, I think the reason your cab. producer puts syrah in his cab. is irrelevant - if he doesn't tell you.
Second, I suspect you are in for several disappointments.
Best, Jim
 
originally posted by Scott Kraft:
But more to the question, what FlaJim said. I suspect people started to realize there was little to appreciate in a trophy syrah that couldn't be had in a cheap, industrial shiraz. Why pay $25+, often $50+, for a beverage that you can buy with a cute critter on it for under $20?
Click to expand...
Scott,
First - caveat - I live here.
Second, if we are talking about the plethora of Parker and Spectator highly rated (and hence, highly priced) syrahs from CA, I agree.
From anywhere else or from producers in CA not "in the loop," I think a case by case analysis is warranted. At any price.
Best, Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top