TN: Diinner at Dino's (3/8/17)

originally posted by mark e:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
No. Just being careless, despite the intellectual damage belief in BD reaks.
Click to expand...

I doubt you would be so forgiving if a student had done that. First wreaks [sic] instead of reeks. Then reaks [sic] instead of wreaks?

Ah, ha. Fun is fine, but you are a bit heavy handed about Biodynamics.
Click to expand...

So offer a defense of it, not of this consequence or that one, which might be had with going organic or simply because one is more attentive with what is going on in the vineyard, but of its presiding view of nature and the directives that go with it. With regard to winemaking, one can say that it mostly does no harm. Homeopathy also does cure some ills. But they are pseudo-sciences.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
It's not about defense; it's about correct depiction.
Click to expand...

So in what way have I depicted incorrectly. The stated purpose of the Demeter rules is to assure that all products saying they are biodynamically produced have all biodynamic content or as much as is practicable. This is virtually a paraphrase of the introduction to the document that Jeff linked us to. One can go to the Demeter site and get the stated principles of BD, but you hardly need to as you probably have a good idea. And they will tell you the principles by which it is determined what makes the content of a product biodynamic. It should be clear that those principles have little to do with the principles behind making wine that reflects terroir. With regard to natural wine, they have the same relationship that they have with the principles of organic farming, which is to say that they encompass those principles but, since for divergent reasons, with divergent extra mandates of their own. This is what I believe I said above.What about it do you find wanting?

As to my accusation that BD is a pseudo-science, you would be right to say that that is a separate issue since if the principles underlying the pseudo-science happened to coincide with those that determined what winemaking interventions were to be avoided, they would produce the same end. But, as I have said, above, they do not coincide. At the beginning of this, Brad instanced the fact that Pontet Canet as evidence that they were moving to be less spoofed. This is what I have been arguing against. The fact that Pontet Canet and Chapoutier are both BD doesn't by itself prove the distinction but it leads you to the right direction. BD and enemies of spoof are accidental allies at best and the existence of spoofed BD domaines shows the danger of confusing them.
 
Your point is well taken that the objectives do not coincide, but for us drinkers, when choosing a bottle among unknowns at a restaurant, Demeter now seems a much better bet than Ecocert, when previously it wasn't.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Your point is well taken that the objectives do not coincide, but for us drinkers, when choosing a bottle among unknowns at a restaurant, Demeter now seems a much better bet than Ecocert, when previously it wasn't.
Click to expand...

As long as you don't mind choosing a Pontet Canet or a Chapoutier about as often as you get a Joly or a Marcoux.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Your point is well taken that the objectives do not coincide, but for us drinkers, when choosing a bottle among unknowns at a restaurant, Demeter now seems a much better bet than Ecocert, when previously it wasn't.
Click to expand...

As long as you don't mind choosing a Pontet Canet or a Chapoutier about as often as you get a Joly or a Marcoux.
Click to expand...

Are these guys really Demeter certified? Hard to believe they use indigenous yeasts.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Your point is well taken that the objectives do not coincide, but for us drinkers, when choosing a bottle among unknowns at a restaurant, Demeter now seems a much better bet than Ecocert, when previously it wasn't.
Click to expand...

As long as you don't mind choosing a Pontet Canet or a Chapoutier about as often as you get a Joly or a Marcoux.
Click to expand...

Are these guys really Demeter certified? Hard to believe they use indigenous yeasts.
Click to expand...

Chapoutier I know is. Pontet Cantet I've read on a couple of websites. As I said at the outset, there are more ways of spoofing then are known to biodynamic philosophy, Horatio.
 
I just read the wine section that Jeff linked to, and it seems clear that a Demeter certification, if the inspectors aren't being bought off, is partially indicative of natural winemaking, certainly preferable to an Ecocert label.

Demeter distinguishes between Biodynamic Wine and Made From Biodynamic Grapes Wine, the latter being less resrictive.

For certified Biodynamic wine, on the plus side, concentration of must is not permitted, micro-oxygenation is not permitted, no imported yeast or malolactic bacteria are permitted, and acid and sugar adjustment are not permitted.

On the negative side, SO2 can be used ("within certain limitations") during harvesting, approved yeast nutrients are permitted during fermentation, fining and filtering (including sterile filtration) is permitted, oak staves and dust (sic) are permitted, wines can be cold stabilized, and can have up to 100 ppm of measured SO2 at bottling (nothing is said about volcanic SO2).

And, as Jeff pointed out, the use of any method not mentioned is not permitted unless first cleared with Demeter.

So, not perfect, but overall not bad.
 
Surely a better method would be finding out about the wine. If in a restaurant, I would rather ask a sommelier than depend on hope because it's biodynamic--to the extent that menus tell you such things. Outside of a restaurant, well you do whatever it is you always do.
 
Am I jaded to ask if it's reasonable to rely on a sommelier, given that we're not just the average punters? I mean, good ones are good and know their stuff*, but they're not legion. Unless you only frequent the small number of restaurants that have the top brass?

*And may have found things we haven't yet, having done the various legwork. (Oh, that sounds inadvertently dirty.)
 
I guess I'm scalded by going to a restaurant in Boston a few years ago (just after Hurricane Sandy) that was reputed for its wine list. SFJ and I asked the sommelier how the 2004 Sansonnière La Lune was, because sometimes older renditions got... brown.

I knew a bunch about the wine and had had vintages of the latest stuff maybe running back five or six years.

The wine server went to go Google any information she could find about the wine. Uselessly uninformative.
 
Even if I could trust the somm, which is doubtful outside of handpicked places, I often find myself in restaurants without them, particularly in countries like Spain, Portugal and Italy. To better deal with a wine list full of unknowns, I am delighted to learn that the Demeter label is at least some kind of foghorn. Until now, the only indicator I could look to for vague guidance was the alcohol level.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
I just read the wine section that Jeff linked to, and it seems clear that a Demeter certification, if the inspectors aren't being bought off, is partially indicative of natural winemaking, certainly preferable to an Ecocert label.

Demeter distinguishes between Biodynamic Wine and Made From Biodynamic Grapes Wine, the latter being less resrictive.

For certified Biodynamic wine, on the plus side, concentration of must is not permitted, micro-oxygenation is not permitted, no imported yeast or malolactic bacteria are permitted, and acid and sugar adjustment are not permitted.

On the negative side, SO2 can be used ("within certain limitations") during harvesting, approved yeast nutrients are permitted during fermentation, fining and filtering (including sterile filtration) is permitted, oak staves and dust (sic) are permitted, wines can be cold stabilized, and can have up to 100 ppm of measured SO2 at bottling (nothing is said about volcanic SO2).

And, as Jeff pointed out, the use of any method not mentioned is not permitted unless first cleared with Demeter.

So, not perfect, but overall not bad.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Oswaldo. Not sure if everyone is aware but the Demeter standards cited only apply to the US. The European (read: International) standards are different.

About 10 years ago there was a great deal of conflict regarding the new US Demeter standards; alas, some of the more "industrial" folk prevailed on wood chips though many of us were against it; our concerns were not listened to.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Even if I could trust the somm, which is doubtful outside of handpicked places, I often find myself in restaurants without them, particularly in countries like Spain, Portugal and Italy. To better deal with a wine list full of unknowns, I am delighted to learn that the Demeter label is at least some kind of foghorn. Until now, the only indicator I could look to for vague guidance was the alcohol level.
Click to expand...

Trooping aroud Sicily and Calabria, I echo O. I have found the bio (organic) tag plus abv % info to be highly helpful.

Except for today at lunch in Rome, where '12 fac-simile was available for 150. (Can I get 2 to go? I wanted to ask, but did not; I just very much enjoyed the one.)
 
Found this link for Demeter International Standards, oddly sited in the Ukraine, and found the contents somewhat at odds with the USA version, and not for the better.

Starting on page 5, there is an Aim column, full of good intentions, and a Standard column, showing what is currently allowed. Higher levels of SO2 than the American version, plus ok to chaptalize up to 1.5% and add tartaric acid. Lots of lip service, but considerable permissiveness when it comes down to it. So, not good, as they say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top