Tag Archives: natural wine

More Silliness About Natural Wine

30 Thursday Jul 2020

Posted by in Wine Culture

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

stomping wine grapesAn article entitled “Is Natural Wine a Millennial Con? is bound to be silly, an opportunity for the author to show she’s “down with the zeitgeist” while giving it the old side-eye.

Sure enough this article from Vogue in the UK offers a clueless explanation for the increasing popularity of natural wines. Quoting the infinite wisdom of the founder of a new wine club, we get this gem:

With natural wines, there are two or three things converging to cause its popularity,” Lachkovic explains. “Firstly, wine has become quite homogenised. Secondly, there’s a general consumer shift towards authenticity – to what wine traditionally tasted like.” Authenticity, as we all know, is one of Generation Y’s favourite buzzwords. Furthermore, the packaging of much natural wine is designed, as if by algorithm, to set our pulses racing: from folksy labels, to wine in cartons as opposed to boring bottles.

Huh?

First of all wine has not become homogenized. Quite the opposite. Of course supermarket wines taste the same—they are designed to taste that way. But large, commercial wineries are a tiny fraction of the number of wineries in the world, most of which are striving for differentiation. New wine regions are sprouting like weeds. Wine is now made in every state in the U.S., and most of those states have their own indigenous wine cultures with distinctive varietals and unique terroirs. Throughout the world, emerging new wine regions from Great Britain to China promise to add to the stock of diverse tasting experiences. Wine grapes are increasingly grown in extreme environments—from high in the Andes, to the deserts of the Golan Heights, to the chilly lake sides of Canada. Projects such as Vox Vineyards in Kansas City, Bodegas Torres in Spain, and Randle Grahm’s Popolucham Vineyard near Santa Cruz, California are rediscovering lost or ignored varietals, while the University of Minnesota develops new varietals that can survive Northern winters.

Winemakers in all of these regions are constantly experimenting with new techniques in the vineyard and the winery. Natural wine is part of this mix, part of a general trend toward diversity, not a lonely outpost in opposition to the crowd.

And “authenticity” may be a buzzword but it has little to do with “what wine traditionally tasted like.” Which tradition are we returning to? Wineries started using sulfur to preserve wine in the early 1900’s. So he must be referring to wine in the 19th Century. We don’t really know what wine tasted like in the 19th Century, but I doubt it resembles today’s natural wines. For one thing, refrigeration wasn’t widely available until the 20th century. Controlling temperatures through the whole process of winemaking is crucial for all wines including natural wines. Those funky flavors would be really, really funky without it. Secondly, natural winemakers may not use much technology in the winery but they use a host of modern improvements in our knowledge of viticulture to keep their grapes happy and healthy. Bio-dynamics, after all, wasn’t invented until the 1920’s and all modern winemakers benefit from our knowledge of clones, soil drainage, and vine balance along with the widespread use of leaf pulling and crop thinning which are modern developments.

Furthermore, I can tell you from several decades experience in the classroom that  generations X, Y, or Z care little for historical authenticity. They care little for history period.

As to the packaging of natural wines, I have yet to taste one that wasn’t in a “boring bottle”.

The natural wine phenomenon is interesting and remarkable. But like most changes in the wine world it’s about variation. Natural wines taste differently than conventionally made wines. It’s about tasting the unexpected, respecting the land, and living with what nature provides as much as possible. It is part of the modern wine world not in opposition to it.

Are Natural Wines Terroir-Driven?

29 Monday Jul 2019

Posted by in Philosophy of Food and Wine, Wine Culture

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

natural wine 2One of the justifications for natural wine that you sometimes hear is that wines that are made without sulfur, filtering or other winery interventions reveal features of the vineyard site and local weather more readily than conventional wines. I don’t think this is quite true and this is not the best way to understand natural wine.

Even though natural winemakers start their fermentations using native vineyard yeasts, the dominant yeasts that complete the fermentation are not necessarily from the vineyard. The hardier yeasts that populate the winery and winery equipment can often take over the fermentation, especially as alcohols creep up and kill off the wild yeasts; they may be a different strain from the yeasts in the vineyard and can sometimes profoundly impact the flavors and textures of the wine.

Furthermore, in the absence of sulfur or filtering, bacteria blooms and oxidation can cause unusual flavors and aromas to develop. These flavors and aromas are often interesting and delicious but they are not coming from the vineyard. In fact the distinctive character of the vineyard or vintage may be more difficult to discern when masked by the strong aromas coming from bacteriological activity.

Thus natural wines don’t necessarily reflect the distinctive character of a vineyard—what they do reflect is the distinctive character of the total environment in which the wine is made. In the absence of intervention by the winemaker, ambient yeast and bacteria populations, ambient temperatures, availability to oxygen, etc. have some influence on the flavor of the wine.

This is not to say that vineyard site doesn’t matter. The quality of the grapes always matters. But what makes a natural wine distinctive may or may not be vineyard specific. Instead of capturing forces at work in the vineyard, natural wines capture a wider variety of causal factors in the environment that emerge as a result of the winemaker’s hands off approach.

If you have a great vineyard that produces wines of distinction, it’s an open question whether that distinctiveness can be captured by natural wine production. Only experimentation and a tolerance for risk will reveal the answer.

On Defining Natural wine

24 Wednesday Jul 2019

Posted by in Philosophy of Food and Wine, Wine Culture

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

amphoraMy Twitter feed has been lit up for several days since Oliver Styles posted his rant against the Wine Spectator’s James Molesworth—the topic of course was natural wine. Is there any other topic of controversy in the wine world these days? I posted about the Styles piece on Monday so I won’t revisit that. But, as is usually the case with debates about natural wine, the controversy comes back to charges that natural wine is so ill defined or poorly conceived as a wine category that the term is meaningless.

Tom Wark got right to the point:

Natural wine: sulphur or no? Can a commercial yeast overtake the fermentation or no? Fermenting to dryness manipulation? Is pruning manipulation? Is planting a cover crop manipulation? What about spraying fermented cow sh*t? Give a definition & then we can talk “meaning”.

This charge that natural wine is poorly defined has been around since the early days of the natural wine movement. I think the charge was true years ago but no longer. But before saying more about how natural wine is defined we need some clarity about definitions.

The demand that definitions be precise and create clear conceptual categories in natural languages is misplaced. Words are defined according to how they’re used and that seldom creates clear conceptual distinctions. Is a bean bag “chair” a chair? Yes, because we sit in them but they don’t satisfy any other condition for being a chair—no flat surface, back, or legs. Yet, we sit on rocks but don’t refer to them as chairs. We just have a habit of calling bean bags “chairs” because in the context in which we encounter them it’s useful to do so. Is a golf cart an automobile? Well, an automobile mechanic might work on it but don’t try to get a license for it. There are clear cases of “chairs” and clear cases of “automobiles” but also ambiguous cases like bean bags and golf carts that fit one category for certain purposes but not others. Yet no one would claim the word “chair” or “automobile” is meaningless.

I’m making two points here. (1) Words are defined by how they’re used and to know the meaning of a word you have to look at the practice in which the word is embedded. And (2) even after gaining a good working definition of a term there will always be ambiguous cases where we don’t quite know what to say about whether a usage is proper or not.

Both points apply in the case of natural wine. You can’t discover what counts as “natural wine” by looking at the definition of “natural” in some other context. You have to look at the practice of making natural wine to determine how the term is used in that context. And even after seeing the practice whole there will be ambiguous cases that we can’t quite categorize. This is not peculiar to the word “natural”. It is how language works.

When we look at how natural winemaking has evolved there are two components to a definition. In the vineyard, largely for reasons having to do with ecology as well as human health, no chemical pesticides are allowed. If leaf pulling, pruning, planting cover crops, etc. have no ill effects on human health, vineyard health, or ecology there is no reason to forbid them. If it turns out that spraying fermented cowshit is harmful then we would expect natural winemakers to stop the practice. In the absence of such evidence why would this be an issue?

In the winery, Alice Feiring’s definition is helpful:

The category of natural wine is a somewhat slippery slope except predicated by the tenets of nothing added nothing taken away, a touch of sulfur as needed if needed.

No filtering or fining, no cultivated yeast, no enzymes, no acidification. These are strict criteria and relatively clear. But even with these criteria there is ambiguity. What is meant by “as needed, if needed”? There are many points in the winemaking process in which sulfur can be added “if needed”. That could add up to quite a lot of sulfur. But in talking to natural winemakers it seems to me something like 20-25 ppm is now a rough standard, and is usually applied at bottling to prevent storage or refermentation issues. And when we say “nothing added” does that include oxygen? That of course would be absurd. Pump overs introduce oxygen but they are needed to release carbon dioxide. No one thinks adding oxygen by moving the cap is an unnecessary intervention.

As to the issue of yeast, it is a well established fact that yeast strains in the winery and on winery equipment can take over the fermentation from vineyard yeast. That winery yeast colonizing the fermentation could be a cultivated yeast strain introduced years ago by previous occupants of the winery. But since that yeast is now part of the winery ecology, why would that be problematic? The point of natural winemaking is to allow the wine to develop according to its own trajectory, to allow the internal structure of the wine and it’s environment to determine how it will develop. The distinctive features of the winery are part of that environment; not an intervention.

Again, when you look closely at the practice of natural winemaking and what it’s point is, these apparent conceptual issues get resolved. It’s not about some abstract meaning of “natural”—its about what winemakers who practice natural winemaking do.

Which brings me to my final point. Winemaking is a process, a series of changes that the grapes and the wine undergoes. When we define natural wine we are defining a kind of production process. Like all artisanal winemaking, it is a process that involves interactions with a changing environment that profoundly influences the wine. Winemaking is about constantly reacting to those changes. Thus, winemaking is not a set of rules. There is no recipe for artisanal winemaking because the wine and the environment are changing in unpredictable ways. It seems to me what defines natural winemaking is not a set of rigid criteria but a commitment to minimal intervention. When there is a problem, the least intervention to solve it is the right one. But of course what counts as minimal intervention will change from vintage to vintage, from vineyard to vineyard, from region to region. Neither the problems nor the solutions are universal or even generalizable.

So how can we know if a wine is authentically natural? You have to look at the producer’s practice over several vintages, and know the challenges, problems, and her solutions to those problems in order to judge whether interventions are minimal. That is a complicated matter but wine is complicated.

What is the point of natural wine? The point is that there are expressive possibilities inherent in grapes—a potential that is not solely the result of human intervention, an inherited constitution. Natural winemaking is an attempt to isolate that potential and respect it.

You may or may not like these wines. They can be peculiar. But there is nothing incoherent or meaningless about respecting the inherited constitution of something.

The Wine Spectator Lives in a Bubble

22 Monday Jul 2019

Posted by in Wine Culture

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

,

bubbleAt Wine Searcher, winemaker and writer Oliver Styles eviscerates the Wine Spectator’s Senior Editor James Molesworth for his apparent dogmatic attitude towards natural wine.

There should always be room for debate, he says, but, only 16 words down the line, he states that the reality is that natural wine “doesn’t work”. This is what natural wine fans have to contend with all the time: a reasoned demand for debate, for reconciliation, a meeting of minds over a nice glass of wine, and then the social equivalent of Molesworth flipping you – all of you – the bird.

For those of you unfamiliar with this debate that now rages in the wine world, natural wine enthusiasts are often accused of being dogmatic because they allegedly insist that there is only one way to make wine—their way. (I seldom hear them actually make this claim but perhaps I’m hanging out with the wrong people)

Styles points out how dogmatic Molesworth is in his comments on natural wine. He quotes Molesworth as saying:

the ones I like I simply consider good, soulful wines – not natural wines.

Molesworth seems to be saying if it’s good it can’t be natural; if it’s natural it can’t be good. In philosophy we call this “the no true Scotsman” fallacy—a logical fallacy in which the speaker attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition to exclude the counterexample.

Styles’ defense of natural wine is right on the mark, pointing out that it’s hardly dogmatic to be concerned about pesticide use.

But I want to emphasize another point he makes in passing.

Which is a shame because, as I’ve said in the past, if Wine Spectator – or any publication, for that matter – were to do a one-off, special edition, entirely devoted to natural wine, it would surely be wildly popular and gain that publication a slice of demographic hitherto closed to them. I don’t know where the advertising revenue would come from – which probably gets to the crux of it – but there it is.

I don’t read the Wine Spectator religiously so perhaps I’ve missed feature articles on natural wine. But my impression, confirmed by a quick Google search, is that aside from an occasional report from the Raw Wine fair and one or two winemaker profiles, the Wine Spectator pays little attention to natural wine. Of course, if you look at sales data, perhaps the thinness of the coverage is justified. Natural wine sales are a tiny fraction of total wine sales. But the Wine Spectator purports to be a journalistic enterprise and discussions about natural wine and its meaning are the hot topic in the wine world—natural wine is wine’s avant-garde.

Furthermore, given the growth in organic vineyards and bio-dynamic farming, along with the interest in natural wine shown by millennials and influential somms, it should be obvious that this is no passing fad. Conversations about natural wine within the wine community are likely to continue unabated and increase in importance.

Thus, the Wine Spectator and other publications that focus on conventional wines only are missing the most important story in the wine world. Regardless of whether their critics like them or not, natural wines pose a challenge to conventional tastes and represent a potentially important shift in our concept of wine quality.

It’s journalistic malpractice not to cover them.

Wine Review: Donkey and Goat “Eliza” Barsotti Vineyard El Dorado 2016

05 Tuesday Feb 2019

Posted by in Wine Reviews

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

donkey and goat elizaDonkey and Goat is one of the better known wineries committed to natural wine. Operating since 2004 out of a small, urban facility in Berkeley CA they source fruit from sustainably farmed vineyards in Napa, Mendocino and the Sierra Foothills and employ minimal intervention winemaking—native yeasts, no fining or filtering, and nothing added except minimal sulfur at bottling. The amount of ink (or bites) they’ve received in the press is astounding.

This white Rhone-style blend exudes personality and inner strength.

A pretty golden hue in the glass, funky sea breeze aromas strike first, with lemon undertones, then showing honey, and ripe peach. Good intensity with the lure of the offbeat to stimulate interest.

The palate is texturally interesting initially showing a top layer of etched minerality, then a layer of fleshy, honeyed peach ornaments the midsection, finishing with subtle weight,  like the feel of wet clay, and a final snap of lemon zest and salinity rekindling a fading melody.

Earthy, luridly erotic, and provocative, with Lady Marmalade it will dance with you.

Technical Notes: Sourced from  Barsotti Vineyard at 2700 ft. in elevation in the Sierra Foothills, a blend of Clairette, Picpoul, Vermentino, Roussanne, and Grenache Blanc, aged 10 months in used oak.

Score: 92

Price: $42

Alc: 12.2%

The Art of Wine: Coturri Winery Petite Sirah Mendocino County 2016

22 Tuesday Jan 2019

Posted by in The Art of Wine, Wine Reviews

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

coturriToday, natural winemaking is the avant-garde of the wine world. That’s ironic since prior to the 1950’s most wines were made without pesticides in the vineyard, cultured yeast, or any of the additives now common in the wine industry. Located in the rugged hills behind Glen Ellen, Tony Coturri started making wine with his father on this property in 1963. Even then they were bucking the trend toward industrial winemaking,  growing organically, using natural yeast with no added sulfites, and no fining or filtering. Tony told me it was cheaper and easier to make wine the old fashioned way—just crushing, pressing and bottling. He’s now an icon of the natural wine movement since he was doing it long before most of the current crop of natural winemakers were in diapers. coturri2

Selling natural wine before there was a natural wine movement was not easy. In the 1980’s Tony would often hide his production methods from potential buyers lest they worry about exploding bottles from revived fermentations. But eventually that art of making natural wine that appeals to conventional tastes earned him plenty of customers along with the respect of none other than Robert Parker, who in the early 90’s gave Coturri wines good scores on several bottles.

It’s not hard to see why Parker liked these wines. The current trend among natural winemakers is to pick early before the grapes get too ripe, keeping alcohol low and emphasizing fresh fruit flavors. But Tony bucks this trend as well. His wines have plenty of fresh fruit but most of them, like this Petite Sirah under review, are explosive with massive, ripe fruit flavors and great depth.

coturri3But before I get to the Petite Sirah we should consider the issue of ageing natural wines. Natural wines with no added sulfur to act as a preservative have a reputation for not ageing well. There are of course many natural winemakers who don’t make their wines to age. But Tony opened a 1984 Pinot Noir and I brought a 1985 home—both were still vibrant and delicious. The 1985 was loaded with dried porcini mushroom aromas, good fruit power, clean, bright acidity and just a whisper of tannin. So much for the assumption that natural wine won’t age.

As for the Petite Sirah, it’s a glorious melee of generous berry aromas, fig, coffee, cinnamon and a prominent scent that hovered between sassafras and licorice—very intense and striking.

The palate opens with bold, dense blackberry progressing to a rather gentle, elegant midpalate with port-like flavors, and a penetrating finish that is surprisingly acid-driven. Petite Sirah is known for mouth-ripping tannins, but two years in barrel have tamed the beast. The tannins are broad and chewy with good length yet supple and fine grained. All this textural refinement happens beneath persistent, hi-toned acidity that gives the wine a tense, taut line from the opening through the citrusy punch on the finish.

The beat of dark blood–powerful, elegant, edgy, funky—it has an volatile, apocalyptic personality, fiercely euphoric with the mood shifts of a diva. Pair with the relentless, post-punk, otherworldly atmospherics of The Clash, London Calling

Technical Notes: From Poor Ranch Vineyard, vines average over 30 yrs. old, certified organic, elevation is 1176 ft., aged in used French oak.

Score: 93

Price: $35 (Purchase Here)

Alc: 14.5%

Ga Ga Over Glou Glou—Yes It’s Baby Talk

14 Monday Jan 2019

Posted by in Wine Culture

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

,

person chuggingFrom “terroir” to élevage” to “sommelier”, the French have given us a wonderful vocabulary for denoting various elements in wine production and consumption. Their most recent linguistic import, despite the onomatopoeia, will hopefully have less long term significance.

You may not have heard the phrase glou-glou yet. It hasn’t quite hit the mainstream although it’s common in natural wine circles. Roughly translated, it means glug-glug mimicking the sound liquid makes when you chug it down your throat. It has come to refer to wines that are so refreshing you want to grab the bottle and keep drinking. It’s the hip version of porch pounder and among some natural wine aficionados, it’s become almost talismanic. Here are just a few encomia to the glories of glou-glou:

From Helen Johannesen, who owns the LA bottle shop Helen’s Wines:

It’s easy; it’s casual; it’s a vin de soif,” she said. “You’re not going to be swirling it in your glass over three hours trying to extract the tasting notes … It’s also a vibe—like: It’s a party! It’s cool! Life is for the living! (She said “living” in a Frenchy way.)

From Italian winemaker Stefano Bellotti:

So I decided, instead of making serious wine, I just wanted to make wine. Wine to drink. I make a red and a white. It worked out really well because instead of making wines that you have to intellectualize, I’ve also produced ones that just win you over, a wine you don’t think about, that you take great pleasure in drinking. You don’t need to worry what about the region or the varietal or the nose or whatever. When you do this you are intellectualizing wine, and wine doesn’t give a shit about being intellectual. So it’s “Simply” red or white: you bring them to the table and you don’t think about it, you just drink it. That’s it.

Summing up the general tenor, Louis Dressner finds this gem of hyperbole:

It’s more than just drinking. It’s a lifestyle.” said some bearded hipster.

It sounds like someone’s been drinking the adult Kool-Aid.

There are many methods for preserving freshness and fruitiness in wine. Glou-glou specifically refers to the use of carbonic or semi-carbonic maceration in which whole grapes are fermented in a carbon dioxide environment that allows the juice to ferment while still inside the berry. The result is a very juicy wine with low tannins. This is the method of fermentation that gives the wines of Beaujolais their distinctive bubblegum and banana aromas, which finds its most sublimely ridiculous expression in the cheaply made, expensively marketed, insipid Beaujolais Nouveau.

That this has become the cause célèbre of the natural wine movement is a shame.

Wine is of course many things. One of those things is a simple, inexpensive thirst quencher that we can drink while relaxing or occupied with other tasks. There is always room for this sort of wine and glou glou wines are more interesting and drinkable than most of the plonk you find at the supermarket.

But that is not all wine is. Wine is also a deeply complex, fascinating intellectual terrain as well as the source of great beauty, and an emotional lure connecting us to the land, the community, and to history. Anyone who thinks the future of wine lies in wiping out those deep resources in favor of weeknight chug-a-lug fundamentally misunderstands the scope of wine’s attractions. The glou glou wine style has a place; the excitement surrounding it is just juvenile.

As Simon Woolf, an expert on natural wines wrote recently:

Glou-glou dumbs wine down. Our thirst for juice light and bright with not a tannin in sight is being quenched at the expense of other qualities. Why should a winemaker sweat about structure when what’s most prized is fluidity? How many natural wine drinkers still care about longevity? How many importers or bars have the sitzfleisch to lay wine down? Why would they bother? When a market thirsts for something juicy and new and asks no questions (“don’t think” is another tenant of glou) such as whether a wine might be better given a year or two, what the market gets is you-know-who.

I’ve been drinking a good deal of natural wine lately and have visited several winemakers devoted to making wines that minimize interventions in the winery. I only occasionally come across a wine that I would describe as glou-glou. Thankfully, not everyone is on board the glou glou craze.

Natural wine is a fascinating and promising area of wine production driven by sound ethical and environmental principles as well as a search for distinctive flavors and vineyard expressions. If it is taken over by this simple minded pursuit of simplicity it will become just another passing fad attractive to only those unserious about wine. That is neither aesthetically inspiring nor a wise business strategy.

For more on the philosophy of wine visit my Monday Column archives at Three Quarks Daily

Stirm Wine Company: Peeling Back the Layers of Riesling

25 Tuesday Sep 2018

Posted by in Wine Reviews

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

stirmIn the world of natural wine making, discovery, the quest for something new, is the constant theme that comes up in conversations with winemakers. Ryan Stirm is no exception. “Exploratory, peeling back the layers” was his response to my question about how to describe his winemaking style. He came here from Santa Barbara because he was attracted to the wealth of old, abandoned vineyards he could restore in Santa Cruz. He now leases and farms 8 acres of mountain vineyards, planted with Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, and a little Cabernet Sauvignon, all dry farmed and organic. But alas his first love is Riesling which he must source from Cienega Valley and Santa Barbara since there is little of it in Santa Cruz.

“I believe hot climate Riesling has a future”, he said, the first of many heresies spoken here.

Old Redwood Barrels from 1960’s

He makes multiple dry and off-dry Rieslings from several vineyards, multiple picks, and an array of vinification strategies. It’s in the winery where things get interesting. Some of the wines are fermented in old, redwood barrels from the 1960’s; others in modern, stainless steel tanks with glycol chillers. Some of his whites are on the skins for 24 hrs. to get lots of extraction, pulling out some of the bitter compounds that most winemakers avoid in white wine. Sometimes he will ferment warm to blow off excessive fruit aromas and allows some purposeful oxidation early which he claims softens the bitterness, and then sends the wine through full malolactic fermentation. All of this is heresy among conventional makers of Riesling. Add to that the signature of natural wine—native yeasts, no filtering, and sometimes a bit of sulfur at bottling–and you have a master class in how to play with wine.

It should be said there is some theoretical support for early oxidation. When Burgundy was grappling with their premature oxidation crisis a few years back, one theory about its cause was that the grapes were not exposed to sufficient oxygen when they were pressed, which according to the theory protects the wine from oxidation as it ages in the bottle and makes it more stable.

But enough theory. The results of this experimentation are wines of stunning intensity and energy. I could have picked any of his line up of distinctive Rieslings to review but this one stood out.

Stirm Riesling Wirz Vineyard Cienega Valley 2016

Gold color reflects that early oxidation. The intense, focused nose is packed with scents of ripe peach, honey,red  apple, haloed with the smell of fresh air after a rainstorm—enticing and nuanced. There’s a bit of petrol, but at this point it’s still a background note. And despite the use of oxidation there is no hint of oxidative aromas.

A dry Riesling, iIn the mouth it’s round and full with a bit of weight up front, but surges quickly through an expansive, prickly midpalate, and a mouthwatering, tart,  hi toned finish. After that initial burst of fruit, it settles into complex textural layers—piercing and dynamic, steely with finely etched fruit in the midsection, and some tannic grip at the foundation all held in glorious tension. Ample dynamic range for this wine from round and fruity to cutting and thrusting with relentless intensity pulsating through a crystalline finish.

Brash, confrontational, a bit schizo from friendly to fierce in an instant, like Pat Benatar’s Heartbreaker.

Score: 92

Price: $28

Alc: 12.7%

Wine Review: Ambyth Estate Mourvedre 2013 and Re Vera 2012 Paso Robles

28 Tuesday Aug 2018

Posted by in Wine Reviews

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

ambythNatural wine and bio-dynamic farming have become an accepted part of wine culture these days but it wasn’t always the case. Ambyth was doing it back in the early days. With vineyards planted in the early 2000’s, Philip and Mary Hart were already using biodynamic preparations on the young vines, and since their first vintage in 2010 they’ve used no additives, filtering, commercial yeast or sulfur. Today, with son Gelert and his wife Robyn operating the winery, they make about 1500 cases of world class natural wine using dry farmed fruit from their Paso Robles estate.

Some people in the wine industry have doubts about whether natural wines can age without the use of sulfur as a preservative, but Ambyth is proving the doubters wrong. The reds are aged for at least 2 years in neutral oak or amphora and are 5 years old before they’re released. These wines are vibrant with no hint of spoilage. Gelert attributes the aging potential to what he calls “happy oxidation”. Low and slow like Bar B Q, the introduction of oxygen via the right aging vessels build strength for long aging. Whatever the explanation, these lively, elegant wines are distinctive, interesting, and delicious.

Mourvedre 2013

Blackberry melds with red fruit and mushroom. A bit of garrique plays with the muted cider background, while hints of tar linger in the glass. This is a very savory wine. Cranberry emerges on the back of the mid palate. It’s very juicy up front but with tense acidity emerging early its quite nervy in the top notes which provides an interesting contrast with the soft, velvet mouthfeel on a medium frame. Subtle, refined tannins lurk as the action unfolds aloft, the wine skitters across the palate, animated, euphoric, almost jittery but with a soothing side that climbs back from the edge.

Nitin Sawhney’s Acquired Dreams has a similar, upper register animation, with the soft, bass note ostinato and soothing synth strings providing warmth and comfort.

Score: 92     Price: $45      Alc: 12.3%

Re Vera 2012

This blend of Mourvedre, Counoise, Grenache, and Syrah leaves a distinctly different impression. Full bodied, round with depth and concentration, very drying, powdery tannins enter early giving this wine more booming, bass notes without the soaring acidity. It’s movement is like a slow flood, dark, brooding, enigmatic, even a bit somber. It has a polished steel texture but the tannins wrap the palate in a briary blanket giving the wine an enveloping, tactile intensity.

Dried fig, dried cherry, garrique, smoke and coffee aromas reinforce the gloom redeemed by a layer of rich, midpalate fruit that lightens the load. The honest, haunting “Golden” by A Girl Called Eddy captures this wine’s depth and the power.

Score: 91      Price: $45      Alc: 12.8%

Wine Review: Roark Wine Company Cabernet Franc Santa Ynez Valley 2016

24 Tuesday Jul 2018

Posted by in Wine Reviews

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

roarkRyan Roark produces about 1500 cases of natural wine out of a small warehouse in Buellton just outside Santa Barbara. His goal is to showcase the distinctiveness of each vintage. “If you want consistency, make Coca Cola”:, Ryan quips. And so he uses only neutral barrels, native yeasts, and no additions except for a minimal amount of sulfur.

This Cabernet Franc is sourced from two organic vineyards in Santa Ynez Valley and Happy Canyon.

This has a bit more depth and concentration than most natural wines on the market. Aromas of red plum, dried flowers, and earth notes are shaded with the slightest intimation of gorgonzola.

On the palate the generous introduction turns minerally and crisp on the midpalate with a pleasant citrus note—think orange zest on a bed of graphite.

On the lighter side of medium body, and neither lush nor lean, it has a silky luster in the mouthfeel that contrasts with the zest and graphite thing. Well managed tannins and good acidity form a firm but seamless backbone keeping the focus on minerality. The finish has good length with a powdery exit. Buoyant and gentle, the wine is eccentrically cheerful, relaxed but quirky. A unique expression of Cabernet Franc.

Iron and Wine’s “Lovesong of the Buzzard” moves with the same gentle buoyancy.

Technical notes: 20% stem inclusion.

Score: 90

Price: $32 (Purchase here)

Alc: 13%