That non-sulphur thing...

J

Joel Stewart

Joel Stewart
I had a wine last night that I've had before. Last night's was the non-sulphured version. The one before was sulphured. Though completely drinkable, this one (in my mind) could not be recognized as the same wine as the sulphured version, and I prefer the sulphured. Why? Because A) this wine tasted thinner, more astringent and, most importantly, brettier...and B) this wine tasted like other producer's wines in similar winemaking circumstances, even with different grapes. In other words, to my limited experience, there is a sameness here that is over-riding the diffs between producers, plots (even regions) and seemingly, the grapes themselves. Would that sameness be due to vineyard and cellar microbes that wait in the wings for such a low or non SO2 chance, to dive into the wine and make it their own?

(Note: edited for hopefully more clarity)
 
Assuming the difference was due exclusively to SO2, something we may never know for sure, that's sad to hear. The conventional wisdom (of the radicals) would be that no/low SO2 would reduce sameness because SO2 prozacs everything into a mild stupor, at least for a while, but the way you put it sounds reasonable too. Did you see Eric Texier's recent comments about comparing batches of the same wine with and without?
 
Oswaldo, that may be the conventional wisdom among the no/low crowd, but I'm not so it's the conventional wisdom among everyone else. Putting aside wines with obvious infections -- which doesn't mean that the ones I'm about to consider were infection-free, only that the infections were below my threshold (lab tests might be interesting) -- I do side with those who think that the no/low wines often taste broadly similar across grapes and appellations. The common organoleptics happen to be something I generally like, which is nice, but from the philosophical standpoint of a taster it's not really any different than the commonality imposed by new oak. (From the philosophical standpoint of a winemaker or grower, of course, there's a world of difference.)
 
On one hand, it doesn't make sense to me that wines to which one DOESN'T add a substance taste broadly similar across grapes and appelations, while adding said substance makes those same wines capable of being different. On the other hand, as I am reading you and Joel, SO2 can be likened to a vaccine. If you didn't vaccinate human beings against smallpox, the skin of those that catch it would look similar, but if you vaccinate them, they are able to survive the disease and live to express their differences.
 
I don't know the mechanism by which no/low-sulfur wines taste broadly similar. Maybe Eric or someone else can help. It seems counter-intuitive to me as well, but the non-discouragement of blooms of this or that at least makes sense as an explanation, and I haven't heard another that does.
 
originally posted by Thor:
I don't know the mechanism by which no/low-sulfur wines taste broadly similar. Maybe Eric or someone else can help. It seems counter-intuitive to me as well, but the non-discouragement of blooms of this or that at least makes sense as an explanation, and I haven't heard another that does.
Click to expand...

In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.

At it's extremes, no different from Rolland-ism or Accad-ism.
 
In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.
Click to expand...
Yes, agreed, but the problem I have is that similarly-made wines that are still normally-sulfured retain more differentiation. So this may be part of the explanation, but it's not all of it.
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Thor:
I don't know the mechanism by which no/low-sulfur wines taste broadly similar. Maybe Eric or someone else can help. It seems counter-intuitive to me as well, but the non-discouragement of blooms of this or that at least makes sense as an explanation, and I haven't heard another that does.
Click to expand...

In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.

At it's extremes, no different from Rolland-ism or Accad-ism.
Click to expand...
That's most of it.

There are probably common odorants in wine that react rapidly with SO2 (aldehydes and such) and are therefore taken out of the nose of wines with SO2. They would persist in clean wines without SO2.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Thor:
I don't know the mechanism by which no/low-sulfur wines taste broadly similar. Maybe Eric or someone else can help. It seems counter-intuitive to me as well, but the non-discouragement of blooms of this or that at least makes sense as an explanation, and I haven't heard another that does.
Click to expand...

In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.

At it's extremes, no different from Rolland-ism or Accad-ism.
Click to expand...
That's most of it.

There are probably common odorants in wine that react rapidly with SO2 (aldehydes and such) and are therefore taken out of the nose of wines with SO2. They would persist in clean wines without SO2.
Click to expand...

Yeah, aldehydes and shit.
 
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by VLM:
In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.
Click to expand...
That's most of it.
Click to expand...
So, the whole low-sulfur hipster wine show gets summed up into a single flavor profile... and the wine-makers move on to the next "big" thing?
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by SFJoe:
originally posted by VLM:
In order to do it you have to practice a series of techniques (cold soak, semi-carbonic). These invariably mark the wines.
Click to expand...
That's most of it.
Click to expand...
So, the whole low-sulfur hipster wine show gets summed up into a single flavor profile... and the wine-makers move on to the next "big" thing?
Click to expand...

Orange.

Noodle knows what's next, as Joe would say.
 
originally posted by Thor:
I don't know the mechanism by which no/low-sulfur wines taste broadly similar. Maybe Eric or someone else can help. It seems counter-intuitive to me as well, but the non-discouragement of blooms of this or that at least makes sense as an explanation, and I haven't heard another that does.
Click to expand...

The other most often mentioned would be oxidation. Oxidation effects are pretty consistent across many different kinds of wines, so oxidation (either overt or subliminal) would possibly promote a sameness.
I think that enzymes may also have a hand, but that's usually not considered much of a factor in finished wines (as opposed to juices and musts) by the oeno-bigwigs.

Seems perfectly plausible to me that sans soufre wines might show a certain sameness across different cultivars, regions, etc. SO2 is, after all, a preservative. Avoiding the philosophical briar patch that suggests that the mere attempt to preserve involves some loss (ref. "US Patriot Act"), a judicious use of SO2 to preserve the character of what was yielded at harvest seems one way to prevent a blurring of lines.
Or maybe not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top