Filtration

Reminds me of Robert Parker's crusade against filtration back in the '80s.

I feel the tug of emoticons for the above sentence but I will remain strong.
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
Reminds me of Robert Parker's crusade against filtration back in the '80s.

I feel the tug of emoticons for the above sentence but I will remain strong.
Click to expand...

As they say, a stopped clock is right twice a day.
 
Very interesting piece. Startling to read someone preferring even a bit of SO2 to filtration.

Albeit in a different context, natural winemakers who produce wines with residual sugar (e.g., demi sec and moelleux Vouvrays) seem to consider filtration far preferable to SO2.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

Albeit in a different context, natural winemakers who produce wines with residual sugar (e.g., demi sec and moelleux Vouvrays) seem to consider filtration far preferable to SO2.
Click to expand...

Assuming that one is sterile filtering and assuming that bottling is conducted under sterile conditions, the resultant wine has no yeast or bacteria left to spoil it. SO2's effectiveness diminishes over time (as it becomes bound) thus anything that survived initial dosing could begin to grow.

Or such is my understanding of that particular preference.
And it is a preference that may also be attractive to those who stop ML.
Best, Jim
 
Good to know about the longer lasting effects.

For some reason, using sterile filtration to produce wines with some residual sugar seems less objectionable than using it to stop mlf, but I'm not sure I could justify that.

I also suspect that industrial doses of SO2 dampen wine, making it shut down for a few years, and may also contribute to headaches and worse hangovers, etc.
 
From only my experience which is almost all anecdotal:

-Large doses of SO2 are very hard for me to justify. I am extremely sensitive to sulphur in wine (so, for example, J. J. Prum and I don't play well together). And while it is true that aging or exposure to oxygen can make a difference, I wonder just how altered the wine is even with such exposure.

-I am afraid of stopping ML and not sterile filtering. I know people who don't and have good luck but an entire batch being spoiled by refermentation in bottle is something that would keep me up at night.

-I noticed in the article that the author lumped all filtration techniques under the heading of bad. Of course, he was speaking of Beaujolais only and I have nothing to dispute that specific claim. But I don't feel that all types of filtration (or fining, for that matter) are "bad" for other varieties. It's a case by case basis and I have used it when I felt it appropriate. Hell, I had one wine go into a cross-flow unit and come out better, on both the nose and palate.

-In every taste test that I have done where the same wine, filtered and unfiltered, was tasted a year or more after bottling, I have seen little difference or preferred the filtered version. (Although, I never tasted Beaujolais that way.)

None of this is intended to endorse filtering or SO2 (or any other product) in all cases. But neither do I see a major problem with their use.

As to whether this is manipulative or natural, I will leave to the individual to decide. I have little idea what those terms mean.

Best, Jim
 
Years ago, we were in the cellars of M. Lapierre tasting wines (15 samples tasted in an era when he made a single cuvée -- fascinating!). Toward the end of the tasting, he gave us two samples to taste side-by-side. One sample was open and delicious, whereas the other was comparatively muted. He explained that we'd just tasted the sans soufre and sulfured version of the same wine (the '99). Everyone present (including a British importer) preferred the bright and cheery sans soufre. He opined that the sulfured version would eventually open back up and approach the appeal of the sans soufre but remained unconvinced that it would ever fully "recover" from the SO2 treatment.

Mark Lipton
 
I'd prefer to use neither sulfur nor filtration.
But, forced to choose which one I consider more damaging I'd go with filtration. This is a gross generalization, of course. But I've never used the filter I own, while most of my wines have smallish (
 
originally posted by Florida Jim:
From only my experience which is almost all anecdotal:

[...]

-In every taste test that I have done where the same wine, filtered and unfiltered, was tasted a year or more after bottling, I have seen little difference or preferred the filtered version. (Although, I never tasted Beaujolais that way.)

[...]

Best, Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,

Have you done similar tests with yeast? With apologies for the drift, I'm curious if early distinctions fade.
 
originally posted by Cliff:
originally posted by Florida Jim:
From only my experience which is almost all anecdotal:

[...]

-In every taste test that I have done where the same wine, filtered and unfiltered, was tasted a year or more after bottling, I have seen little difference or preferred the filtered version. (Although, I never tasted Beaujolais that way.)

[...]

Best, Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,

Have you done similar tests with yeast? With apologies for the drift, I'm curious if early distinctions fade.
Click to expand...
Nope.
Best, Jim
 
Reading the article I was interested to note that the author thinks that avoiding sediment is listed as one of the main reasons why people filter. I don't think this is the case, more cold stabilization. Also, many producers feel that cross-flow filtration has a very different effect on wine than eg plate filtration.
 
originally posted by Oliver McCrum:
Also, many producers feel that cross-flow filtration has a very different effect on wine than eg plate filtration.
Click to expand...
What do they say about the two methods? Do you agree?
 
The other thing that isn't mentioned is that with some filter types (cartridge/bell filters, for example) there's a pretty wide range of filter porosity available to winemakers. A .2micron and a 5 micron filter aren't going to do the same thing to a wine, both are 'filtered'.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Oliver McCrum:
Also, many producers feel that cross-flow filtration has a very different effect on wine than eg plate filtration.
Click to expand...
What do they say about the two methods? Do you agree?
Click to expand...

I haven't done a direct comparison, but some producers I respect use crossflow filtration and are very happy with it. Most Italian white wines aren't put through ML, and bottling a wine that hasn't been through ML without filtration is risky. I suppose you could say that traditional elevage for bigger reds and classic white Burgundy works to stabilize wines without the use of more modern methods like filtration.

The claim in the article that you can easily and consistently tell filtered wines from not strikes me as suspect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top