Red Burgundy Stems: mit oder ohne?

I

Ian Fitzsimmons

Ian Fitzsimmons
I'm a slow learner, but think I'm figuring out that I lean towards red Burgundy with at least some stems in the fermentation. What I see some note-takers describing as vegetal flavors in these wines, I often take in as stylish nuance and complexity. But my sampling has been mostly limited to Pernand and Savigny - Bize Fourneaux '96 was my 'Eve' wine, after all.

Is there scope for discussion here on the stem-inclusion/exclusion techniques used by different winemakers in the region, who does what and how it turns out?
 
Yesterday I was scanning some recent notes by John Gilman about Burgundy producers and was impressed by how frequently he discusses stem inclusion, chaptalization and acidification.
 
Seems to me Chaptalization and acidification are much grosser interventions than stem inclusion; stems are part of the plant, after all. I think the former is often accepted at modest levels as a way of prolonging fermentation to build flavor as much as body. Acidified Burgundy sounds kind of icky.
 
I didn't mean to imply any ethical parity by including them in the same sentence. Merely practices I would like to know more about.
 
On a sort of related note, I've always wondered what the "traditional Burgundian fermentation" is by definition. If there even is an accepted definition.
 
originally posted by Kay Bixler:
On a sort of related note, I've always wondered what the "traditional Burgundian fermentation" is by definition. If there even is an accepted definition.
Click to expand...

you'd have to pick your era. the one ever-present constant in [pick your world] is change.
 
originally posted by robert ames:
originally posted by Kay Bixler:
On a sort of related note, I've always wondered what the "traditional Burgundian fermentation" is by definition. If there even is an accepted definition.
Click to expand...

you'd have to pick your era. the one ever-present constant in [pick your world] is change.
Click to expand...

Maybe your sub-region, too? I get the feeling the phrase is used when discussing Beaujolais to draw a sharp distinction relative to carbonic or semi-carbonic fermentation.
 
This brings up even more questions. Would a traditional Burgundian fermentation (at least as I understand it) also be considered a semi-carbonic fermentation?

They load up a big wooden vat with whole clusters, cover it up and then after a while climb in there and stomp them down into must, that ferments for a while and then off to the press. Semi-carbonic, right?
 
I browsed Coates's first volume last night, reading the section on acidification, chaptalization and stems. Iirc, he wrote that stem inclusion at least leans 'traditional.' One of the many cited reasons he lists for retaining stems, though, is to promote some fermentation within grapes that have whole, unbroken skins, which, I believe, is also one of the reasons for inducing carbonic/semi-carbonic fermentation in Beaujolais. So the distinction between traditional and otherwise gets blurry, as you point out.

Stepping back, I'd imagine 'traditional' fermentation encompasses a whole palette of techniques and variations, which the seasoned vintner would introduce or omit, depending on his preferences, together with the characteristics of his/her grapes, vineyard and the vintage.

I dimly remember Kramer writing in Making Sense about complete de-stemming as a relative innovation, possibly associated with the then-recent Accad method.
 
I see no reason why Burgundy (or any other region for that matter) should be home to a single, monolithic tradition. More likely, multiple approaches to winemaking have existed within the region since they started making wine there. Winemakers have historically been empiricists at heart: let's try various techniques, grapes, etc. and see what works the best. After a time, a collective wisdom emerges suggesting that you want Pinot Noir on that sun-exposed hillside over there, but Auxerrois in the gully to the left, and that in cold years you might want to remove more of the stems than you do in warm years, but there will always be iconoclasts who choose to test that wisdom, at least to the extent that INAO and EU rules permit these days.

Mark Lipton
 
I think we're agreeing, Mark. Scary.

originally posted by Kay Bixler:
http://www.wineterroirs.com/2011/10/philippe_pacalet_foot_stomping_devatting_.html

Lots of information here and as always, great pictures.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I greatly admire Celce's essays. Most interesting to me here is the role stems play in regulating fermentation temperature - also mentioned by Coates - and grossly filtering the young wine.

Having reviewed Coates's and Norman's books, I realize description of stem-destem protocol is a standard element of domaine descriptions. I'm surprised to learn that, say, Bize and Pavelot in Savigny both include some stems, because the style of the wines from these two vinters seem fairly distinct. Obviously, other parts of the wine-making process are also steer the character of the wine produced.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Red B'y Stems
Click to expand...

Can you not just type the word "Burgundy"?
Click to expand...

I respect and benefit from your love of language and its proper forms. I also think shortcuts are reasonable, even rational, where context and audience knowledge reduce the likelihood of misunderstanding to a low order.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:

Having reviewed Coates's and Norman's books, I realize description of stem-destem protocol is a standard element of domaine descriptions. I'm surprised to learn that, say, Bize and Pavelot in Savigny both include some stems, because the style of the wines from these two vinters seem fairly distinct.
Click to expand...

Where did you get that Pavelot includes stems (or did you mean to say Chandon-de-Briailles)? Hugues always tells me that he destems completely and Jasper Morris and Coates both report the same.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Red B'y Stems
Click to expand...

Can you not just type the word "Burgundy"?
Click to expand...

I respect and benefit from your love of language and its proper forms. I also think shortcuts are reasonable, even rational, where context and audience knowledge reduce the likelihood of misunderstanding to a low order.
Click to expand...

This is not such a case. If you do a search, you are the only person writing "B'y" and "B'x."

It's faux in-the-know. It's a speed bump to comprehension. It's silly. Other, easier-to-recognize shortcuts exist for these terms, to boot.

This is my opinion.
 
originally posted by Claude Kolm:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:

Having reviewed Coates's and Norman's books, I realize description of stem-destem protocol is a standard element of domaine descriptions. I'm surprised to learn that, say, Bize and Pavelot in Savigny both include some stems, because the style of the wines from these two vinters seem fairly distinct.
Click to expand...

Where did you get that Pavelot includes stems (or did you mean to say Chandon-de-Briailles)? Hugues always tells me that he destems completely and Jasper Morris and Coates both report the same.
Click to expand...

I read it in Norman and Taylor, 2010 (p. 135); however, it's just a small percentage and only in 'ripe, healthy' years, excluding, for example, 2006-2008. I'd overlooked this qualification when I wrote the previous post; it fits in with your information, as well as my own (highly inexpert) sense that these wines are not 'stemmy.'
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Red B'y Stems
Click to expand...

Can you not just type the word "Burgundy"?
Click to expand...

I respect and benefit from your love of language and its proper forms. I also think shortcuts are reasonable, even rational, where context and audience knowledge reduce the likelihood of misunderstanding to a low order.
Click to expand...

This is not such a case. If you do a search, you are the only person writing "B'y" and "B'x."

It's faux in-the-know. It's a speed bump to comprehension. It's silly. Other, easier-to-recognize shortcuts exist for these terms, to boot.

This is my opinion.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this opinion, despite my esteem for your judgement in general. For me, these shortenings are just easier typing, but if others here also think they're obnoxious, I'll forgo them in the future.
 
I don't think they're obnoxious but have to admit I had no idea what "B'y" stood for until opening the thread. Now BoJo on the other hand . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top