Gamay and Brett ('14 Coquelet Chiroubles VV)

[Jonathan Loesberg]

In order to make my own position clear, taken in a loose Wittgensteinian sense, I think the term "natural wine" is a useful rule of thumb category. If someone refers to a wine as a natural wine, you probably have a rough idea what to expect, what flaws you may encounter, what qualities you might enjoy. And taken this way, arguments on the order of, wine begins with intervention and what really is natural anyway are quibbles about something you do know the meaning of. But rules of thumb categories can only go so far. If you attempt to get foundational with them, you will fairly quickly come to grief. For better or worse, Oswaldo, I think you have been bitten by the foundational but and that is the reason for the pushback you are experiencing, or anyway, the pushback you experience from me.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by MLipton:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

Every definition of natural that I've encountered treats destemming as not an intervention, but I see your point. Other examples might be batonnage and lees aging, which pass the nothing added/nothing subtracted test, but could be called interventions.

And what about temperature controlled fermentations, O.? Especially in light of climate change, must a naturaliste rely solely on deep leadership mestones caves?

Mark Lipton

I'm hardly an arbiter, Mark, but I consider temperature controlled fermentations to be an intervention, unlike naturally cold caves. Perhaps analogous to malos blocked by SO2 or sterile filtration versus simply not happening.

If one goes to motive, a temperature controlled fermentation often seeks to emphasize primary (fruit) flavors over secondary (fermentation) flavors, whereas a naturally cold cave will simply produce whatever it produces, independent of intent.

So if I’m a Gung-Ho young vigneron who wants to make natural wine but can’t afford a cold cellar, I’m shit out of luck? And why should motive matter? Nathan, do you still know it when you see it now?

The question does not make sense. A young vigneron who makes natural wine normally will not want to control fermentation temperatures, and if temperatures go so high as to threaten to ruin the wine, he can cool the tanks by splashing the sides with cold water.

Are you sure you don't just mean "primitive"?

 

[mark e]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by MLipton:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

Every definition of natural that I've encountered treats destemming as not an intervention, but I see your point. Other examples might be batonnage and lees aging, which pass the nothing added/nothing subtracted test, but could be called interventions.

And what about temperature controlled fermentations, O.? Especially in light of climate change, must a naturaliste rely solely on deep leadership mestones caves?

Mark Lipton

I'm hardly an arbiter, Mark, but I consider temperature controlled fermentations to be an intervention, unlike naturally cold caves. Perhaps analogous to malos blocked by SO2 or sterile filtration versus simply not happening.

If one goes to motive, a temperature controlled fermentation often seeks to emphasize primary (fruit) flavors over secondary (fermentation) flavors, whereas a naturally cold cave will simply produce whatever it produces, independent of intent.

So if I’m a Gung-Ho young vigneron who wants to make natural wine but can’t afford a cold cellar, I’m shit out of luck? And why should motive matter? Nathan, do you still know it when you see it now?

The question does not make sense. A young vigneron who makes natural wine normally will not want to control fermentation temperatures, and if temperatures go so high as to threaten to ruin the wine, he can cool the tanks by splashing the sides with cold water.

Are you sure you don't just mean "primitive"?

I always assumed that O was kidding about splashing the water.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

Back to brett, one of the things that makes it such a difficult issue is that brett populations can skyrocket without any consistent warning for labs to detect, nor as far as I know is there any accurate method of prediction. This on top of the difficulty of knowing which aromatic compounds the brett is going to create or boost. So the pleasant hint of farmyard-at-a-distance can turn into a face-dive in the chicken coop. Which makes the decision to suppress brett or not a binary one for many winemakers.

But I'm not up on the latest research or developments; hopefully some progress has been made over recent years on controlling or predicting populations and brett impact.

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by mark e:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by MLipton:

And what about temperature controlled fermentations, O.? Especially in light of climate change, must a naturaliste rely solely on deep leadership mestones caves?

Mark Lipton

I'm hardly an arbiter, Mark, but I consider temperature controlled fermentations to be an intervention, unlike naturally cold caves. Perhaps analogous to malos blocked by SO2 or sterile filtration versus simply not happening.

If one goes to motive, a temperature controlled fermentation often seeks to emphasize primary (fruit) flavors over secondary (fermentation) flavors, whereas a naturally cold cave will simply produce whatever it produces, independent of intent.

So if I’m a Gung-Ho young vigneron who wants to make natural wine but can’t afford a cold cellar, I’m shit out of luck? And why should motive matter? Nathan, do you still know it when you see it now?

The question does not make sense. A young vigneron who makes natural wine normally will not want to control fermentation temperatures, and if temperatures go so high as to threaten to ruin the wine, he can cool the tanks by splashing the sides with cold water.

Are you sure you don't just mean "primitive"?

I always assumed that O was kidding about splashing the water.

Ha-ha, I was told by someone who has done it that this actually works fairly well on out-of-the-ground amphora or small concrete fermenters (not outdoors).

 

[Steve Edmunds]

works better with stainless, which transmits heat or cold much more efficiently. Concrete doesn't change temperature quickly, except perhaps if you drop it through the ice into a deep lake in January.

 

[georg lauer]

originally posted by Steve Edmunds:
works better with stainless, which transmits heat or cold much more efficiently. Concrete doesn't change temperature quickly, except perhaps if you drop it through the ice into a deep lake in January.

Isn't the cooling because clay and (unsealed concrete) will absorb some water and then there is a cooling effect when it evaporates? Just like the terra cotta wine coolers.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
And here I was thinking for the last decade that we were the premier wine board for natural wines...

We are?

Time for a refresher...

Oswaldo, my friend Popper wants me to ask: Is it possible for a wine-maker to avoid spinning cones and rotofermenters and all the other trickery and yet make a non-natural wine?

 

[Christian Miller (CMM)]

originally posted by Steve Edmunds:
works better with stainless, which transmits heat or cold much more efficiently. Concrete doesn't change temperature quickly, except perhaps if you drop it through the ice into a deep lake in January.

Makes sense, but I'm not sure stainless steel qualifies for Oswaldo's natural regime.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
In order to make my own position clear, taken in a loose Wittgensteinian sense, I think the term "natural wine" is a useful rule of thumb category. If someone refers to a wine as a natural wine, you probably have a rough idea what to expect, what flaws you may encounter, what qualities you might enjoy. And taken this way, arguments on the order of, wine begins with intervention and what really is natural anyway are quibbles about something you do know the meaning of. But rules of thumb categories can only go so far. If you attempt to get foundational with them, you will fairly quickly come to grief. For better or worse, Oswaldo, I think you have been bitten by the foundational but and that is the reason for the pushback you are experiencing, or anyway, the pushback you experience from me.

Fair enough. But at least it's not blind fundamentalism, since I don't grant natural wines leeway as far as defects. I want to have my process ethics and drink it too (not an easy life).

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by MLipton:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

Every definition of natural that I've encountered treats destemming as not an intervention, but I see your point. Other examples might be batonnage and lees aging, which pass the nothing added/nothing subtracted test, but could be called interventions.

And what about temperature controlled fermentations, O.? Especially in light of climate change, must a naturaliste rely solely on deep leadership mestones caves?

Mark Lipton

I'm hardly an arbiter, Mark, but I consider temperature controlled fermentations to be an intervention, unlike naturally cold caves. Perhaps analogous to malos blocked by SO2 or sterile filtration versus simply not happening.

If one goes to motive, a temperature controlled fermentation often seeks to emphasize primary (fruit) flavors over secondary (fermentation) flavors, whereas a naturally cold cave will simply produce whatever it produces, independent of intent.

So if I’m a Gung-Ho young vigneron who wants to make natural wine but can’t afford a cold cellar, I’m shit out of luck? And why should motive matter? Nathan, do you still know it when you see it now?

The question does not make sense. A young vigneron who makes natural wine normally will not want to control fermentation temperatures, and if temperatures go so high as to threaten to ruin the wine, he can cool the tanks by splashing the sides with cold water.

Are you sure you don't just mean "primitive"?

Interestingly no, I'm not sure. Apologists of natural wine note its similarity to wine made before chemical companies started to peddle chemical farming and modern technology started to appear in cellars (though SO2, acid, sugar and oak were already established additions). Vasco Croft of Aphros makes his anfora wines in a cellar without electricity. In spirit, please feel free to propose the term Primitive Wine as a replacement for Natural Wine.

 

[mark e]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Vasco Croft of Aphros makes his “nfora wines in a cellar without electricity, illustrating the spirit of what you're suggesting.

I take it he uses a candle to the check the wines (well, an employee, probably) because a flashlight would be too high-tech?

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by mark e:

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jayson Cohen:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by MLipton:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

Every definition of natural that I've encountered treats destemming as not an intervention, but I see your point. Other examples might be batonnage and lees aging, which pass the nothing added/nothing subtracted test, but could be called interventions.

And what about temperature controlled fermentations, O.? Especially in light of climate change, must a naturaliste rely solely on deep leadership mestones caves?

Mark Lipton

I'm hardly an arbiter, Mark, but I consider temperature controlled fermentations to be an intervention, unlike naturally cold caves. Perhaps analogous to malos blocked by SO2 or sterile filtration versus simply not happening.

If one goes to motive, a temperature controlled fermentation often seeks to emphasize primary (fruit) flavors over secondary (fermentation) flavors, whereas a naturally cold cave will simply produce whatever it produces, independent of intent.

So if I’m a Gung-Ho young vigneron who wants to make natural wine but can’t afford a cold cellar, I’m shit out of luck? And why should motive matter? Nathan, do you still know it when you see it now?

The question does not make sense. A young vigneron who makes natural wine normally will not want to control fermentation temperatures, and if temperatures go so high as to threaten to ruin the wine, he can cool the tanks by splashing the sides with cold water.

Are you sure you don't just mean "primitive"?

I always assumed that O was kidding about splashing the water.

I wasn't, I've read about winemakers having to do that when temperatures in the cellar were rising into the 30s Celcius.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by mark e:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Vasco Croft of Aphros makes his “nfora wines in a cellar without electricity, illustrating the spirit of what you're suggesting.

I take it he uses a candle to the check the wines (well, an employee, probably) because a flashlight would be too high-tech?

Alas, I don't know, you'll have to ask him at your next Waldorf pow-wow.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
And here I was thinking for the last decade that we were the premier wine board for natural wines...

We are?

I used to think so, but have been finally disabused. Perhaps this was closer to the truth in the days of the founding fathers, several of whom are now dearly departed, leaving the place somewhat more eclectic. Dressner, for sure, would have not put up with some of the pre-revolutionary recidivism we've been seeing.

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:

Oswaldo, my friend Popper wants me to ask: Is it possible for a wine-maker to avoid spinning cones and rotofermenters and all the other trickery and yet make a non-natural wine?

Indeed, the luddite spoofulator can make non-natural wine the old-fashioned way, adding sugar, acid and vanillin, while using SO2 to kill native yeasts and malolactic bacteria.

 

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Christian Miller (CMM):

originally posted by Steve Edmunds:
works better with stainless, which transmits heat or cold much more efficiently. Concrete doesn't change temperature quickly, except perhaps if you drop it through the ice into a deep lake in January.

Makes sense, but I'm not sure stainless steel qualifies for Oswaldo's natural regime.

Stainless steel passes quite handily the nothing added/nothing subtracted test, which can be a good way to distinguish more thought-through objections from less. I certainly prefer it to non-neutral wood. Before stainless steel was developed, any neutral metal could have been used (but would have been too expensive).

 

[Mike Evans]

originally posted by BJ:

originally posted by VLM:

originally posted by Levi Dalton:

originally posted by BJ:
Levi, I think you're awesome, but that's ridiculous. This had nothing to do with an over the hill wine, it had to do with a badly flawed wine. I frankly drink country wines in this age range all the time and they are often great. I merely mentioned the last flawed bottle I had. I could have just as easily mentioned something just released. It is a known problem, on par with overoaking and premox - do you not experience it?

"The thing I find most alarming is that producers who typically have not had brett issues are starting to show up with them - more mainline low volume producers" is what you wrote, and then you went on to cite a 13 year old bottle of Chave Côtes-du-Rhône. Do you have any other examples from Chave that you would like to put forward to support the conclusion that you shared publicly? Please cite them, if so.

Perhaps you are unaware that brett can develop in a bottle over time. Or that shipping and storage conditions can play in a role in the development of brett in a bottle.

Basically, you waited too long to open the bottle, as is your perogative. But you are blaming the producer for this decision on your part, which is lame of you.

Yeah, but for brett to develop in the bottle it has to be there in the first place which means there was an issue in the cellar, if you find brett to be an issue.

Yeah, sorry Levi, I'm not buying it. Perhaps I shouldn't have called out Chave based on one vintage of one cuvee (can't afford "real Chave" anyway), but there's no need to patronize. Yes, of course I know that flaws can show up over time, and if a wine sees heat or sits in a refrigerator or stands up for a while can all lead to problems of all sorts. But I can equally tell you that there are certain producers I have never experienced these issues with, there are producers I frequently experience them with, and there are producers I used to never experience them with, but now do. BTW, these bottles showed no signs of problems with the cork.

To provide a few examples particular to Beaujolais, some producers I would bet good money on that I could grab an old bottle and not experience brett/VA type flaws, even with shaky provenance:
Roilette
Brun
Chermette
Thivin
Chanrion
Tete
Desvignes

Some examples of producers I would expect to see flaws in and thus do not purchase:
Coquelet
Charly Thevenet
Metras
Pacalet
Michel Guignier

Some producers that formerly would be in the first category but at some point started to have problems:
Marcel or Matthieu Lapierre (first flawed bottle in 08)
JP Thevenet
George Descombes

Believe me, those last three are beloved producers for me. I visited Marcel Lapierre multiple times and sadly spent a decent part of an afternoon with him several months before he died. I have tasted with Jean Paul Thevenet, he is a splendid guy. I am guessing the changes have to do with generational changes.

So Chave is safe from the wolf pack but watch out everyone else.

Roillette couldn’t make my list based on a very bretty 1998 Tardive that I opened about five years ago that I bought on release and stored well during the intervening years.

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

My memory was that Dressner was all for importing and drinking wines we call natural, but he was quite skeptical about the label and the early stages of the movement.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
And here I was thinking for the last decade that we were the premier wine board for natural wines...

We are?

I used to think so, but have been finally disabused. Perhaps this was closer to the truth in the days of the founding fathers, several of whom are now dearly departed, leaving the place somewhat more eclectic. Dressner, for sure, would have not put up with some of the pre-revolutionary recidivism we've been seeing

Hm. Force of personality, perhaps. Dressner was good at buffaloing people.

originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Oswaldo, my friend Popper wants me to ask: Is it possible for a wine-maker to avoid spinning cones and rotofermenters and all the other trickery and yet make a non-natural wine?

Indeed, the luddite spoofulator can make non-natural wine the old-fashioned way, adding sugar, acid and vanillin, while using SO2 to kill native yeasts and malolactic bacteria.

Karl thanks you! There's a chance yet for 'natural' to mean more than the word 'epicycle' does (in its realm).

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

Luddite spoofing! What a charming concept. I can just see Ned Ludd condemning machine looms while espousing 3D printers as an allowable alternative to hand looms.