Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Winemaking (rec.crafts.winemaking) Discussion of the process, recipes, tips, techniques and general exchange of lore on the process, methods and history of wine making. Includes traditional grape wines, sparkling wines & champagnes. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've watched the threads here about kit wine vs. juice wine and
homemade wine vs commercial wine with great amusement. I understand everyones position and opinion and many are indeed valid. However here come one you won't believe.... In the new book out by Matt Kramer (writer for Wine Spectator) he talks about wineries in Australia, California, and Bordeaux using vacuum concentrators and reverse osmosis machines to remove some of the water from the juice so they can make a fuller wine. 23 of Bordeaux's estates have these machines. In addition there are 60 reverse osmosis machines operating there. Now I admit I'm no expert but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that these wineries are actually making wine out of concentrate. Or could I say "kit"? AMAZING isn't it? The chapter on how the commercial Aussie wineries have changed the accepted flavor of wine to one which is heavy oak in flavor from one that was heavy in the flavor of the grape is really interesting. I laughed like crazy when he said that the tasters in his own magazine may not be giving accurate scores. Its a great read for those interested. Happy fermenting, Dave Stacy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave,
I agree that it's ironic and I feel that on one level it's a shame too. While one part of me wants to make the best wine possible, another part of me feels that over orchestrating the outcome by technology robs the wine of some of its romance & mystique. I would hate for every wine, weather commercial or my own, to be a uniform product and no more unique an experience than a bottle of catsup. The variations among handcrafted items has always appealed to me. Understand, though, that this opinion comes from a lowly amateur who doesn't have to make his living on the public's acceptance of his output. I guess it has to do with the motivation behind the process, and whether one perceives the history of the wine as part of its attraction. Really, what they're doing is not very different from various Icewine or Reccioto(?) techniques, but those somehow seem more "harmonious" or "elegant" to me. BTW, Most, if not almost all kit wine concentrators use considerable heat in the process, and this results in the formation of hydroxymethylfurfural, which gives the wines a caramel like taste that many people find common to kit wines. The processes you describe wouldn't have that drawback, as HMF only forms at temps over 50°C. Thanks for the post. Mike MTM |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() > While one part of me wants to make the best wine possible, another >part of me feels that over orchestrating the outcome by technology robs >the wine of some of its romance & mystique. I would hate for every wine, >weather commercial or my own, to be a uniform product and no more unique >an experience than a bottle of catsup. <SNIP> That's EXACTLY what he talks about in the book. He spends quite a few pages on how every wine is beginning to taste the same (like an oak plank). By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great experiment. Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because they ALL taste the same. What a shame. The variations among handcrafted >items has always appealed to me. Understand, though, that this opinion >comes from a lowly amateur who doesn't have to make his living on the >public's acceptance of his output. <snip> uh, yep.....me too. >Thanks for the post. You're welcome Dave Stacy > >Mike MTM > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave wrote: SNIP Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because > they ALL taste the same. > What a shame. Agreed. I've noticed that quite a few non-Cab S. wines are strongly reminiscent of Cab S, and I don't think it's just a stylistic similarity. I suspect that many Merlots, Cab Francs, even F A hybrids like Chambourcin, have a fair amount of Cab S. blended in, and it robs them of their varietal distinctions. I go out of my way to try unfamiliar varities, and too many seem to be Cab S wannabees. More's the pity. Mike MTM |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
MikeMTM > wrote in message >...
> Agreed. I've noticed that quite a few non-Cab S. wines are strongly > reminiscent of Cab S, and I don't think it's just a stylistic > similarity. I suspect that many Merlots, Cab Francs, even F A hybrids > like Chambourcin, have a fair amount of Cab S. blended in, and it robs > them of their varietal distinctions. I go out of my way to try > unfamiliar varities, and too many seem to be Cab S wannabees. > > More's the pity. > > Mike MTM You may be right that many wines may have Cab s. blended in, but in the US at least, if a wine is labeled as a vinifera varietal it must have at least 75% of that variety grape in the bottle. For some of the non-vinifera varieties such as Concord the requirement is only 51%. Not sure about the hybrids. Miker |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Miker,
Yes, I'm aware of the 25% regulation (here) in the US. But even 25% of the "savage grape" can be a lot when it comes to blends. I'm sure the various wines I've noticed this in are at or below the limit, but I still sometimes find it obtrusive in a variety which is ordinarily quite different from Cab S. Don't get me wrong, a lot of times it adds to the blend, but other times I think the heavy handed use of such a "big", distinctive grape is more of a distraction than an asset. I've had wines, as I imagine all of us have, which were sold as Merlot or Cab Franc, and could have been passed off as a nice Cab S. Good wines, but not what I wanted when I selected the variety I did. Maybe it's just my pet peeve. Interesting about the different rule for Concord, etc. I don't know that I was aware of it. Enjoy Mike MTM |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave > wrote in message >. ..
>> By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great > experiment. > Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to > $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different > varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of > wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because > they ALL taste the same. > What a shame. > No way. You set (for example) a good Pinot Noir, a good Cabernet and a good Syrah in front of me and I will be able to find the two that match. I'll even be able to tell you which is which (most of the time anyway). There is a lot of indistinct wine out there and a lot of those end up in your local restaurant for BtG pours, but the good wines keep their varietal characteristics even if reverse osmosis is used. Andy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "JEP" > wrote in message om... > Dave > wrote in message >. .. > >> By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great > > experiment. > > Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to > > $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different > > varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of > > wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because > > they ALL taste the same. > > What a shame. > > > > No way. You set (for example) a good Pinot Noir, a good Cabernet and a > good Syrah in front of me and I will be able to find the two that > match. I'll even be able to tell you which is which (most of the time > anyway). > > There is a lot of indistinct wine out there and a lot of those end up > in your local restaurant for BtG pours, but the good wines keep their > varietal characteristics even if reverse osmosis is used. > > Andy Andy, You might enjoy looking at the following paper. It describes an experiment where a trained panel blind tasted and attempted to identify several 1972 and 1973 varietal wines. Here are some of the results for 1973 vintage wines ...... Muscat (76% correct identifications), Riesling (34%), Colombard (26%), Chardonnay (26%), Sauvignon Blanc (18%), Gewürztraminer (6%), Cabernet Sauvignon (39%), Petite Sirah (32%), Pinot Noir (32%), Zinfandel (31%), Merlot (11%). In all, fifteen white wines and eleven red wines were tasted, so the probability of just guessing correctly would be about 1 in 15 (7%) for the white wines and 1 in 11 (9%) for the red wines. Surprising results, especially since the tasting was done by a _trained_ panel. Winton, W. Ough, C.S. and Singleton, V.L. - "Relative distinctiveness of varietal wines estimated by the ability of trained panelists to name the grape variety correctly" - Am. L. Enol. Vit. 26 (1975) 5. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Can this paper be accessed on line?
Emilio Lum > wrote in message ... > > "JEP" > wrote in message > om... > > Dave > wrote in message > >. .. > > >> By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great > > > experiment. > > > Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to > > > $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different > > > varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of > > > wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because > > > they ALL taste the same. > > > What a shame. > > > > > > > No way. You set (for example) a good Pinot Noir, a good Cabernet and a > > good Syrah in front of me and I will be able to find the two that > > match. I'll even be able to tell you which is which (most of the time > > anyway). > > > > There is a lot of indistinct wine out there and a lot of those end up > > in your local restaurant for BtG pours, but the good wines keep their > > varietal characteristics even if reverse osmosis is used. > > > > Andy > > Andy, > You might enjoy looking at the following paper. It describes an experiment > where a trained panel blind tasted and attempted to identify several 1972 > and 1973 varietal wines. > > Here are some of the results for 1973 vintage wines ...... Muscat (76% > correct > identifications), Riesling (34%), Colombard (26%), Chardonnay (26%), > Sauvignon Blanc (18%), Gewürztraminer (6%), Cabernet Sauvignon (39%), Petite > Sirah (32%), Pinot Noir (32%), Zinfandel (31%), Merlot (11%). > > In all, fifteen white wines and eleven red wines were tasted, so the > probability of just guessing correctly would be about 1 in 15 (7%) for the > white wines and 1 in 11 (9%) for the red wines. Surprising results, > especially since the tasting was done by a _trained_ panel. > > Winton, W. Ough, C.S. and Singleton, V.L. - "Relative distinctiveness of > varietal wines estimated by the ability of trained panelists to name the > grape variety correctly" - Am. L. Enol. Vit. 26 (1975) 5. > > > |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Lum" > wrote in message >...
> > Andy, > You might enjoy looking at the following paper. > Winton, W. Ough, C.S. and Singleton, V.L. - "Relative distinctiveness of > varietal wines estimated by the ability of trained panelists to name the > grape variety correctly" - Am. L. Enol. Vit. 26 (1975) 5. I'll see if I can find it, but it doesn't change the fact that I can identify the varietals in many wines. Yes there is some gray area. An oaked Sauvignon Blanc may taste a lot like an oaked Chardonnay and may be hard to differentiate. Even a Merlot with 25% Cabernet and a Cabernet with 25% Merlot may be hard to pick, but a good Pinot Noir and a good Cabernet. No contest. Andy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So what do you think the paper was trying to show, Lum? Not sure how
the tasting of these '72 and '73 wines fits in with the statements made above that all wines are starting to taste the same now - or are you just commenting on Andy's statement that he could tell different varieties apart? "Lum" > wrote in message >... > Andy, > You might enjoy looking at the following paper. It describes an experiment > where a trained panel blind tasted and attempted to identify several 1972 > and 1973 varietal wines. > > Here are some of the results for 1973 vintage wines ...... Muscat (76% > correct > identifications), Riesling (34%), Colombard (26%), Chardonnay (26%), > Sauvignon Blanc (18%), Gewürztraminer (6%), Cabernet Sauvignon (39%), Petite > Sirah (32%), Pinot Noir (32%), Zinfandel (31%), Merlot (11%). > > In all, fifteen white wines and eleven red wines were tasted, so the > probability of just guessing correctly would be about 1 in 15 (7%) for the > white wines and 1 in 11 (9%) for the red wines. Surprising results, > especially since the tasting was done by a _trained_ panel. > > Winton, W. Ough, C.S. and Singleton, V.L. - "Relative distinctiveness of > varietal wines estimated by the ability of trained panelists to name the > grape variety correctly" - Am. L. Enol. Vit. 26 (1975) 5. |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jep,
Generally speaking, I strongly agree with you and disagree with Dave. However, it depends on what the bartender or restaurant owner chooses! I find that the better restaurants tend to have a wine list with plenty of variation, but occasionally I come across a middle-of-the-road restaurant where the list of reds has little variation, and where there is (like a mixture of Shiraz, Cab Sauv, etc) the wines chosen all have a lot of common qualities. It seems to me in those cases that whomever is chosing the wines to put on the list has a fairly narrow range of preference or experience. In such a place I would bet my success would be in line with what Dave is suggesting. But with what you described (even with "half-decent" wines let alone "good" ones) I would confidently bet that I could pick out which is which -- assuming that the wines chosen weren't particularly atypical examples of the variety chosen especially to foil such an experiment... Cheers, Richard (JEP) wrote in message . com>... > Dave > wrote in message >. .. > >> By the way, for those who haven't tried this yet here is a great > > experiment. > > Go to a local restaurant with a good "by the glass" wine list. $7 to > > $10 a glass. Tell the bartender to pour 4 glasses. 3 different > > varitals, but duplicate one of them. So here you sit with 4 glasses of > > wine. Try to find the 2 that are the same. It is REALLY hard because > > they ALL taste the same. > > What a shame. > > > > No way. You set (for example) a good Pinot Noir, a good Cabernet and a > good Syrah in front of me and I will be able to find the two that > match. I'll even be able to tell you which is which (most of the time > anyway). > > There is a lot of indistinct wine out there and a lot of those end up > in your local restaurant for BtG pours, but the good wines keep their > varietal characteristics even if reverse osmosis is used. > > Andy |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If I can believe what I've read in the last couple of years, most of
the kit manufacturers have moved as far away as possible from heating their juices and are using vacuum methods (and maybe other things I don't recall) to concentrate their juices. As for the point of the original poster... It is quite interesting and not entirely surprising. But it's worth noting that the amount of concentration involved in producing typical kits (even the "premium" 15l and 16l kits) is probably far far beyond what these wineries are doing (the water being removed is probably several times as much) so I would expect that any negative effects are going to be several magnitudes greater. Or conversely, the "damage" to those wineries' must should be a small fraction of that done to a premium kit. Also, don't the kit manufacturers also do something to the must to basically sterilize it to prevent spoilage? The wineries presumably would not require this, assuming that they are fermenting it soon after pressing and concentration. It is interesting though... Thanks for the information! Cheers, Richard MikeMTM > wrote in message >... > Dave, > > I agree that it's ironic and I feel that on one level it's a shame too. > > While one part of me wants to make the best wine possible, another > part of me feels that over orchestrating the outcome by technology robs > the wine of some of its romance & mystique. I would hate for every wine, > weather commercial or my own, to be a uniform product and no more unique > an experience than a bottle of catsup. The variations among handcrafted > items has always appealed to me. Understand, though, that this opinion > comes from a lowly amateur who doesn't have to make his living on the > public's acceptance of his output. I guess it has to do with the > motivation behind the process, and whether one perceives the history of > the wine as part of its attraction. Really, what they're doing is not > very different from various Icewine or Reccioto(?) techniques, but those > somehow seem more "harmonious" or "elegant" to me. > > BTW, Most, if not almost all kit wine concentrators use considerable > heat in the process, and this results in the formation of > hydroxymethylfurfural, which gives the wines a caramel like taste that > many people find common to kit wines. The processes you describe > wouldn't have that drawback, as HMF only forms at temps over 50°C. > > Thanks for the post. > > Mike MTM |
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dave" > wrote in message ... > I've watched the threads here about kit wine vs. juice wine and > homemade wine vs commercial wine with great amusement. I understand > everyones position and opinion and many are indeed valid. > > However here come one you won't believe.... > > In the new book out by Matt Kramer (writer for Wine Spectator) he > talks about wineries in Australia, California, and Bordeaux using > vacuum concentrators and reverse osmosis machines to remove some of > the water from the juice so they can make a fuller wine. > 23 of Bordeaux's estates have these machines. In addition there are 60 > reverse osmosis machines operating there. > > Now I admit I'm no expert but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see > that these wineries are actually making wine out of concentrate. Or > could I say "kit"? It's not quite the same. There's no heat involved in the process. Also, the degree of concentration is nowhere near the same as in the manufacture of a kit wine. Tom S |
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Many of the cheap bulk wines are made from concentrates. It alleviates
storage space. Wine is then made as needed. Tim |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Tomato juice from concentrate | General Cooking | |||
reconstituting juice concentrate | Winemaking | |||
juice concentrate | Winemaking | |||
Pineapple Juice Concentrate? | General Cooking | |||
Concentrate Juice | Winemaking |