Clark Smith

[mark meyer]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

Now on the RO. We were in Tasmania recently-my first time- and it seems roughly half of the pinot there goes thru RO-and these RO wines are the ones Halliday and other judges always award the gold medals. Not tasting the RO vs nonRO wines side by side-but separately at wineries-I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Christian,

I don't have any definitive answers to your questions. Tasmania is a relative cool climate-so not sure if the grapes ever reach the shrivelling stage. The grapes are all coming from Tasmania-there are different micro climates within the island-but I don't believe there is alot of blending between regions-at least not by the smaller family owned wineries.

Also not sure how my Reisling friend uses RO to make his sweet wine-he has one at 9 RS, 69(?)RS and 139 RS.

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by Thor:
Compared to a number of highly-regarded wines and winemakers in his general neighborhood, that's "less."

He believes in RO and micro-ox and oak chips.
But he "tries to avoid filtration" (how one can be a proponent of RO and dislike filtration leaves me scratching my head).

Sounds like the same, basic reductionist remedial winemaking patterns to me.

 

[Thor]

To be honest, all of those except chips sound less awful than acidification. But I've been known to be contrary on this point.

Oh, it's a stupid argument. Let's all decide to agree that the wines suck and he's the reason, even though I think you (and Alice?) are the only ones who've tried them. This sort of thing is practically the foundation of the internet, innit?

 

[MarkS]

...we are not talking about genetic altered grapes.

...yet. The day is coming when someone in Stellenbosch will think it's the only way to keep away the baboons.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

originally posted by Thor:
Let's all decide to agree that the wines suck and he's the reason, even though I think you (and Alice?) are the only ones who've tried them.

OK, so, where do the rest of us get some?

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by Thor:
To be honest, all of those except chips sound less awful than acidification. But I've been known to be contrary on this point.

Oh, it's a stupid argument. Let's all decide to agree that the wines suck and he's the reason, even though I think you (and Alice?) are the only ones who've tried them. This sort of thing is practically the foundation of the internet, innit?

I don't think the wines suck.
I thought they were competent, and very much in the recent California vein. Which is to say that they just didn't excite me at all. That's not necessarily an indictment of his practices, though.
I don't fault people for using the techniques they use. As Clark says "This is not a church"... people do what they want, and if it resonates with me I'll get on board. If not, I'll just move on down the road. I also don't like to condemn technique outright because I always end up tripping over exceptions that make me think I've been too categorical in previous statements. Micro-ox and chipping may seem like a recipe for disaster, but they've been employed in some wines I really enjoy. Mike Havens' reds, for instance. He has been a big proponent of the technique and I love his wines. Interestingly, Mike developed much of his technique in cooperation with Clark.... why are the results acceptable (to my mind) in one instance, and not the other? Hard to say, but surely the fact that they are indicates a need for caution in the issuance of sweeping statements, no?

My disagreement with Clark is less in his role as winemaker and more in his public persona as provocateur. In that role he often seems to say things which just don't add up.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

...indicates a need for caution in the issuance of sweeping statements, no?

This is the kind of sentiment that saps our will and undermines the movement. Politburo, arrest this man immediately!

 

[SFJoe]

originally posted by Bruce G.:
Micro-ox and chipping may seem like a recipe for disaster, but they've been employed in some wines I really enjoy. Mike Havens' reds, for instance. He has been a big proponent of the technique and I love his wines.

Any in particular?

 

[Thor]

The day is coming when someone in Stellenbosch will think it's the only way to keep away the baboons.

Oh, I don't know. They let us in.

Bruce, you're not getting my point: having just been left, due to Cory being a complete ρυ$$ψ (I say this with love), to defend "natural" as a wine term over the course of a ridiculous lunchtime argument in Italy despite not actually believing a good portion of what I was arguing for or about, but simply because Hans Gruber* was a jackass who needed dressing down by someone, I do not now want to find myself in an argument defending Clark Smith (of all people), for similar reasons. So...whatever. If I regain interest in the subject, I'll blog about it (again). Otherwise, you "win," even though I know that wasn't your goal. Sorry, I don't mean to be a jackass -- well, more of one -- myself. I'm just unable to gin up the energy for this particular debate right now.

*Not his real name. Alas.

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by Thor:
Bruce, you're not getting my point....

Guess I should have resisted the urge to speechify on process.
Forgive me.... it's snowing here so I have little else to do right now.
Luckily "whatever" works for me as well on this subject so let's leave it at that.

Cheers,

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

I'm just unable to gin up the energy for this particular debate right now.

Ditto, hence confiding myself to silly quips. Clark's work and writing don't fall easily into the various -isms and paradigms in wine geek world, so it takes quite a bit of effort to engage with them.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

Now on the RO. We were in Tasmania recently-my first time- and it seems roughly half of the pinot there goes thru RO-and these RO wines are the ones Halliday and other judges always award the gold medals. Not tasting the RO vs nonRO wines side by side-but separately at wineries-I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

 

[Bruce G.]

originally posted by SFJoe:

Any in particular?

Should have read "loved his wines", Joe.
Mike sold off the company (Havens Wine Cellars), and even though he remained involved for a while things changed.
But while he was there, in control, and on point I thought wines like the mid-90s Bourriquot blends (CF/MER) and his Hudson Vineyard Syrahs were great.

I hear he's currently working with Morgan Peterson (Joel Peterson's son) at Bedrock Wine Company, continuing some of the same work he did at Havens, including some Albarino and a Hudson Vyd Syrah.
Haven't tasted any of the wines, yet, but I'm hopeful that he'll be doing some good work there as well. And all of Morgan's wines probably merit a serious look-see.
[Found during fact-checking, a small video of Mike discussing micro-ox with Morgan: http://blog.bedrockwineco.com/2007/10/23/micro-oxing-with-michael-havens/..... I'm slowly coming to hate the phrase "melted tannins".]

Regards,

[NB: Mike and Kathy Havens are long time friends... whether or not that has anything to do with any of this is up to the reader to decide.]

 

[Claude Kolm]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

Now on the RO. We were in Tasmania recently-my first time- and it seems roughly half of the pinot there goes thru RO-and these RO wines are the ones Halliday and other judges always award the gold medals. Not tasting the RO vs nonRO wines side by side-but separately at wineries-I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

But what I'm saying is that when RO is applied to red Burgundies, the resulting wines are generally much more to stewed fruit, so there seems to be something in the RO process that sends it that way.

 

[Thor]

Y'know, it's interesting b/c I've never had a Havens wine that I thought was worth a damn. I'm still waiting to see what others saw in the wines. I am, of course, sad to know there are no more Havens wines, but I'm sure he'll do something. (Well, I hope he will.)

I'm tempted to blame doctrine, but we'll see.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

But what I'm saying is that when RO is applied to red Burgundies, the resulting wines are generally much more to stewed fruit, so there seems to be something in the RO process that sends it that way.

Curiouser and curiouser! I'm guessing this is RO applied for concentration purposes rather than de-alc? The two times I have tasted RO trials applied to the same wine in different levels (i.e. a percentage of the wine removed, RO'd to remove alcohol, and added back), there was no major change in fruit character, although the overall flavor changed modestly, depending on the alcohol level. Both due to the alcohol itself and the flavors it masked or boosted.

 

[mark meyer]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

But what I'm saying is that when RO is applied to red Burgundies, the resulting wines are generally much more to stewed fruit, so there seems to be something in the RO process that sends it that way.

Curiouser and curiouser! I'm guessing this is RO applied for concentration purposes rather than de-alc? The two times I have tasted RO trials applied to the same wine in different levels (i.e. a percentage of the wine removed, RO'd to remove alcohol, and added back), there was no major change in fruit character, although the overall flavor changed modestly, depending on the alcohol level. Both due to the alcohol itself and the flavors it masked or boosted.

Christian,

I think it is the concentration angle-here is what the Winemaking Tasmania website says about wine and juice concentration. They also have a bit on alc adjustment if you go to the website.

mark

The Memstar concentration process treats grape juice or wine to increase flavour intensity, colour and body. It does this by using reverse osmosis to remove a portion of the grape juice or wine as permeate. Grape juice concentration by reverse osmosis has been used for many years for the removal of water to increase sugar and flavour concentration.

It is ideal for treating juices and musts that have become heavily diluted as a result of rain just before harvest. It is a superior technique for alcohol augmentation compared with the addition of sugar (chaptalisation) but has limited benefits where the grapes are green and under-ripe. Wine concentration after fermentation is the preferred option when sugar levels are already high but the concentration of flavour, colour and other quality components is low.

Typically, you will notice a significant improvement in wine quality with the removal of 10% to 20% of the original volume as permeate. This is a simple, quick and reversible technique

 

[Claude Kolm]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

But what I'm saying is that when RO is applied to red Burgundies, the resulting wines are generally much more to stewed fruit, so there seems to be something in the RO process that sends it that way.

Curiouser and curiouser! I'm guessing this is RO applied for concentration purposes rather than de-alc? The two times I have tasted RO trials applied to the same wine in different levels (i.e. a percentage of the wine removed, RO'd to remove alcohol, and added back), there was no major change in fruit character, although the overall flavor changed modestly, depending on the alcohol level. Both due to the alcohol itself and the flavors it masked or boosted.

Yes, I've only systematically observed it in France, where it is used to remove water. But think about it, as Mark says above, you remove 10-20% of volume. If you remove 10% of volume, a 13% natural alcohol wine goes to 14.4%, and all the other components, good and bad, are increased. A total disaster for wine equilibrium.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Claude Kolm:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

I did seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines and more acidity and vibrancy to the non RO pinots. Also the RO pinots don't seem to change/improve with age.
mark

When you say RO vs. non-RO Pinots, are you referring to RO used to reduce alcohol on a finished wine, or some other usage? And are the RO'd wines made from grapes of the same region and maturity as the non-RO wines, or are they wines that are picked later or come from a hotter vineyard and then RO'd to bring the alcohol back down to non-RO levels?

Good point. My experience is using RO to remove water, in CA it's usually done to remove alcohol. Interesting, if use in Australia is same as CA (i.e., remove alcohol), it would have same effect as removing water does.

I was trying to figure out mark's comment "seem to notice more of a stewed dark fruit character to the RO wines." This would not be too surprising in CA (or Australia?) in that the winemaker is more likely to want to remove alcohol from long hangtime, high sugar grapes, which in turn are more likely to make wine with that stewed/pruney/high pH character. But that would not be related to doing RO, they would taste like that if you left the alcohol in too.

But what I'm saying is that when RO is applied to red Burgundies, the resulting wines are generally much more to stewed fruit, so there seems to be something in the RO process that sends it that way.

Curiouser and curiouser! I'm guessing this is RO applied for concentration purposes rather than de-alc?...

Yes, I've only systematically observed it in France, where it is used to remove water. But think about it, as Mark says above, you remove 10-20% of volume. If you remove 10% of volume, a 13% natural alcohol wine goes to 14.4%, and all the other components, good and bad, are increased. A total disaster for wine equilibrium.

By California standards, that would be a very ham-handed use of RO (not to mention heading in the opposite direction). I guess that's what happens if they are trying to increase concentration as well as alcohol.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by mark meyer:

Christian,

I think it is the concentration angle-here is what the Winemaking Tasmania website says about wine and juice concentration. They also have a bit on alc adjustment if you go to the website.

mark

The Memstar concentration process treats grape juice or wine to increase flavour intensity, colour and body. It does this by using reverse osmosis to remove a portion of the grape juice or wine as permeate. Grape juice concentration by reverse osmosis has been used for many years for the removal of water to increase sugar and flavour concentration.

It is ideal for treating juices and musts that have become heavily diluted as a result of rain just before harvest. It is a superior technique for alcohol augmentation compared with the addition of sugar (chaptalisation) but has limited benefits where the grapes are green and under-ripe. Wine concentration after fermentation is the preferred option when sugar levels are already high but the concentration of flavour, colour and other quality components is low.

Typically, you will notice a significant improvement in wine quality with the removal of 10% to 20% of the original volume as permeate. This is a simple, quick and reversible technique

My experience in tasting RO trials was strictly for removal of alchol, with the trials being done in quite small increments. Clark Smith has plenty more to say on this process. I can imagine how using it for concentration might be an improvement for rain-bloated grapes, and why it wouldn't work well with "under-ripe" grapes (a contentious topic in itself that I'll try to avoid here). I can't say the few tastings I've had of wines "augmented" with RO-created concentrate have impressed me, but maybe there's an art to it. I'm curious as to why you say it's superior to chaptalization for alcohol augmentation (independent of flavor and concentration issues).