Natural Wines: Eric Asimov's Take

[Berry Crawford]

If a winery chooses to label a bottle "Reserve", it has no relationship to what I do. But if they say what they do is "Natural", then that is a direct marketing attack on other wineries - given the redefintion of a word that has an already well defined meaning to consumers. That's why some of us get so worked up over a word. And I don't think for one minute that its use is innocent. Otherwise people would be using the phrase that's been used for years... non-interventionist.

Just because "natural" or "non-interventionist" defines a distinction, why would that be an attack? If you feel that you are in the "interventionist" camp and proud of the wines you make, then whats the problem?

[Adam Lee]

The idea that it is somehow "un-Burgundian" to want to make a pinot noir that has the key aesthetic virtues of Burgundy is getting really tiresome and - let's be honest here - tends to be deployed in an effort to delegitimize domestic wineries who would rather their pinots taste more like Musigny than late-harvest zinfandel. Yes, Burgundy has a lot of distinct terroirs and part of the appeal of Burgundy is expressing those distinctions. But that is only one aspect of what Burgundy is about. Burgundy is also about expressing the beautiful characteristics of the pinot noir grape. So far, those characteristics have also been expressed well in several locations outside Burgundy both within France (Champagne, the Loire) and outside of it (New Zealand, the Santa Cruz Mountains). But there are other places where, if you grew pinot noir, you would end up with fairly ugly results (Antarctica, Saudi Arabia). To say that you should aspire to make an ugly wine because that ugliness is a truer reflection of your terroir than beauty is, IMO, patently ridiculous.

Keith,

First off, my honest initial reaction is to say "screw you" for attempting to ascribe harmful motives towards other domestic wineries to my beliefs and expression of those beliefs. What gall to do so! To think that I would want to delegitimzie any domestic winery is abhorent to me. Not only do I buy grapes from a myriad of different terroirs that, IMO, best represent themselves in a number of different ways (from the Northern end of the Willamette to the southern of the SLH)....but I have been fortunate enough to be friends with people who "would rather their pinots taste liek Musigny than late-harvest Zinfandel." If you doubt that, I encourage you to email Kevin Harvey or Wells Guthrie or Kevin Kelley or Joe Davis. I am also friends with Brian Lorign and Michael Browne and Andrew Vingiello, folks whoes wines are what might be considered by you to be on the opposite end of the stylistic spectrum. And, despite any winemaking or philisophical differences we might have, I respect and like them all. So to say that I am trying to "delegitimze domestic wineries" -- well....screw you.

As far as the beauty of the Pinot Noir grape is concerned....I promise you that you will find no one more committed to that. I have staked my career on that. But, as Benjamin Franklin said, "Beauty, like supreme dominion, is but supported by opinion." Your ridiculous examples of Antartica and Saudi Arabia - so ridiculous that they seem to be the last bastion of a man desperate to make a point - are not what we are discussing here.

I am more than happy to enter into gentler discourse here with you or with anyone else - but first it needs to be lacking in hyperbole and ascription of motives that are not based in truth.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Rick Gregory]

… you contradict yourself by praising terroir, praising the results of VERY specific vineyards and then assuming one can replicate those experiences elsewhere.

I am not saying, and I don’t think John Paul is saying, that the goal is to create a Chambertin or a Musigny knock off, a copy. The goal is greatness. And the fact is no one has ascended to that level of greatness outside of Burgundy. So, in that sense, making Burgundy (i.e. greatness) is the goal. But you’re right and Adam is right in the sense that the only way to truly make Burgundy is to physically be IN Burgundy.

And, as much as I LOVE Burgundy, I don't feel it's the only high quality expression of the grape. To hold it up as that is a linear, boring view of a complex, bewitching grape.

True, it’s not the only high quality expression of the grape. But it is the highest. Again, this assumes the possibility that subjective aesthetic judgements are possible. That Audrey Hepburn is more beautiful than Phyllis Diller.

You're stating your opinions as if they were absolutes. They're not. They're YOUR opinion. Keep that in mind and try not to pretend that what you think is, of course, the ultimate truth.

[Rick Gregory]

The idea that it is somehow "un-Burgundian" to want to make a pinot noir that has the key aesthetic virtues of Burgundy is getting really tiresome and - let's be honest here - tends to be deployed in an effort to delegitimize domestic wineries who would rather their pinots taste more like Musigny than late-harvest zinfandel. Yes, Burgundy has a lot of distinct terroirs and part of the appeal of Burgundy is expressing those distinctions. But that is only one aspect of what Burgundy is about. Burgundy is also about expressing the beautiful characteristics of the pinot noir grape. So far, those characteristics have also been expressed well in several locations outside Burgundy both within France (Champagne, the Loire) and outside of it (New Zealand, the Santa Cruz Mountains). But there are other places where, if you grew pinot noir, you would end up with fairly ugly results (Antarctica, Saudi Arabia). To say that you should aspire to make an ugly wine because that ugliness is a truer reflection of your terroir than beauty is, IMO, patently ridiculous.

Keith? Try not to be a pretentious twit, ok? You're making, again, the error of assuming your opinions are anointed truth.

The "beautiful characteristics of the pinot noir grape" have more expressions than those found in Burgundy. Stretch the grape too far and it does, in fact, lose what it's about but if we want to take the discussion down that road, we should work to define what makes Pinot an enticing grape. For me, it's a certain transparency on the palate that belies the flavor intensity there and a complex, changeable nose. There's more, but I dont want to write a treatise... However, there are expressions of these characteristics outside of your favored areas that are quite true to the nature of the grape. Williams and Selyem from the early 90s, some Rochioli from that era, many others.

[Keith Levenberg]

First off, my honest initial reaction is to say "screw you" for attempting to ascribe harmful motives towards other domestic wineries to my beliefs and expression of those beliefs. What gall to do so! To think that I would want to delegitimzie any domestic winery is abhorent to me. Not only do I buy grapes from a myriad of different terroirs that, IMO, best represent themselves in a number of different ways (from the Northern end of the Willamette to the southern of the SLH)....but I have been fortunate enough to be friends with people who "would rather their pinots taste liek Musigny than late-harvest Zinfandel." If you doubt that, I encourage you to email Kevin Harvey or Wells Guthrie or Kevin Kelley or Joe Davis. I am also friends with Brian Lorign and Michael Browne and Andrew Vingiello, folks whoes wines are what might be considered by you to be on the opposite end of the stylistic spectrum. And, despite any winemaking or philisophical differences we might have, I respect and like them all. So to say that I am trying to "delegitimze domestic wineries" -- well....screw you.

As far as the beauty of the Pinot Noir grape is concerned....I promise you that you will find no one more committed to that. I have staked my career on that. But, as Benjamin Franklin said, "Beauty, like supreme dominion, is but supported by opinion." Your ridiculous examples of Antartica and Saudi Arabia - so ridiculous that they seem to be the last bastion of a man desperate to make a point - are not what we are discussing here.

I am more than happy to enter into gentler discourse here with you or with anyone else - but first it needs to be lacking in hyperbole and ascription of motives that are not based in truth.

Gosh, that was totally uncalled for. Where to begin?

1. You respond to a perfectly reasonable post with "screw you" - repeatedly - and then claim you are trying to engage in "gentler discourse."

2. "Beauty . . . is but supported by opinion." I suppose I somewhat disagree with this quote, and strongly disagree with the relativistic view you're using the quote to support. I've written at length about this before and won't rehash except to say that if beauty is but supported by opinion, it remains the case that some opinions are more valid than others.

3. I am completely flummoxed by your objection to my citation of Antarctica and Saudi Arabia as two places that would probably make lousy pinot noir. It is quite common - so common that I actually feel sheepish having to explain this to you - to illustrate a point by devising the most extreme example you can think of, and then deducing that if something is true in the extreme case than it must have some degree of truth in less extreme cases. To say that this is "ridiculous" and "the last bastion of a man desperate to make a point"? My gosh, what's wrong with you? It's a perfectly common way of making a point, hardly the last bastion of anything. I can assure you the point I was trying to make came to me quite easily and I never experienced a bit of desperation.

[Vincent Fritzsche]

You know what they say, all roads lead to Burgundy. Apparently even when discussing natural wine.

[larry schaffer]

So how bout those Lakers . . .

[Keith Levenberg]

Keith? Try not to be a pretentious twit, ok?

Oh, any serious discussion about wine is going to be vulnerable to the accusation of pretension. We're here because we either know better or don't care!

The "beautiful characteristics of the pinot noir grape" have more expressions than those found in Burgundy. Stretch the grape too far and it does, in fact, lose what it's about but if we want to take the discussion down that road, we should work to define what makes Pinot an enticing grape. For me, it's a certain transparency on the palate that belies the flavor intensity there and a complex, changeable nose. There's more, but I dont want to write a treatise... However, there are expressions of these characteristics outside of your favored areas that are quite true to the nature of the grape. Williams and Selyem from the early 90s, some Rochioli from that era, many others.

Indeed, I cited several New World areas that make beautiful pinot noir and there are certainly others I didn't mention.

[Bruce G]

To say that you should aspire to make an ugly wine because that ugliness is a truer reflection of your terroir than beauty is, IMO, patently ridiculous.

It has been said before, by any number of people. Though the phrasing is usually along the lines of "less immediately attractive", and not the flat-out "ugly".

[Adam Lee]

First off, my honest initial reaction is to say "screw you" for attempting to ascribe harmful motives towards other domestic wineries to my beliefs and expression of those beliefs. What gall to do so! To think that I would want to delegitimzie any domestic winery is abhorent to me. Not only do I buy grapes from a myriad of different terroirs that, IMO, best represent themselves in a number of different ways (from the Northern end of the Willamette to the southern of the SLH)....but I have been fortunate enough to be friends with people who "would rather their pinots taste liek Musigny than late-harvest Zinfandel." If you doubt that, I encourage you to email Kevin Harvey or Wells Guthrie or Kevin Kelley or Joe Davis. I am also friends with Brian Lorign and Michael Browne and Andrew Vingiello, folks whoes wines are what might be considered by you to be on the opposite end of the stylistic spectrum. And, despite any winemaking or philisophical differences we might have, I respect and like them all. So to say that I am trying to "delegitimze domestic wineries" -- well....screw you.

As far as the beauty of the Pinot Noir grape is concerned....I promise you that you will find no one more committed to that. I have staked my career on that. But, as Benjamin Franklin said, "Beauty, like supreme dominion, is but supported by opinion." Your ridiculous examples of Antartica and Saudi Arabia - so ridiculous that they seem to be the last bastion of a man desperate to make a point - are not what we are discussing here.

I am more than happy to enter into gentler discourse here with you or with anyone else - but first it needs to be lacking in hyperbole and ascription of motives that are not based in truth.

Gosh, that was totally uncalled for. Where to begin?

1. You respond to a perfectly reasonable post with "screw you" - repeatedly - and then claim you are trying to engage in "gentler discourse."

2. "Beauty . . . is but supported by opinion." I suppose I somewhat disagree with this quote, and strongly disagree with the relativistic view you're using the quote to support. I've written at length about this before and won't rehash except to say that if beauty is but supported by opinion, it remains the case that some opinions are more valid than others.

3. I am completely flummoxed by your objection to my citation of Antarctica and Saudi Arabia as two places that would probably make lousy pinot noir. It is quite common - so common that I actually feel sheepish having to explain this to you - to illustrate a point by devising the most extreme example you can think of, and then deducing that if something is true in the extreme case than it must have some degree of truth in less extreme cases. To say that this is "ridiculous" and "the last bastion of a man desperate to make a point"? My gosh, what's wrong with you? It's a perfectly common way of making a point, hardly the last bastion of anything. I can assure you the point I was trying to make came to me quite easily and I never experienced a bit of desperation.

Keith,

And therein lies the problem. You believe that it is perfectly reasonable to post that I am attempting to "delegitimize (other) domestic wineries....." Tell me how that is reasonable or reflects what I have done my entire career.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Berry Crawford]

You believe that it is perfectly reasonable to post that I am attempting to "delegitimize (other) domestic wineries....." Tell me how that is reasonable or reflects what I have done my entire career.

Didn't you start a rumor that Holdrege Pinot is just relabled Red Bicylette Vin de Pays pinot noir?

[Jim Swayze]

You're stating your opinions as if they were absolutes. They're not. They're YOUR opinion. Keep that in mind and try not to pretend that what you think is, of course, the ultimate truth.

Where we are really confused as moderns is in our lack of understanding that aesthetics can be both subjective and objective. We've been taught above all else the virtue of openness, that everything's subjective, a simple matter of taste. We are taught that truth is relative.

But it's ain't always so. The truth is that most of the Pinot sites in California are too hot for the grape, produce wines with too much alcohol, requiring too much intervention to correct, and/or lacking appropriate subtlety. These are generalizations, yes, but are are not hard to prove on the macro level. Of course counter examples do exist on the micro level.

[Adam Lee]

Jim,

Since it is not hard, prove to me, on a macro level, that California Pinot Noirs require more adjustments than Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noirs.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Bruce G]

Keith,

And therein lies the problem. You believe that it is perfectly reasonable to post that I am attempting to "delegitimize (other) domestic wineries....." Tell me how that is reasonable or reflects what I have done my entire career.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Adam:

I've no real desire to interject myself between you and Keith, but I feel compelled to ask.... do you think it unreasonable of Brian to do pretty much the same thing by calling the use of the term "natural" by some producers an intentional, direct marketing attack on other wineries?

[Ian Brand]

And then, Jim, there is a vineyard near Point Reyes that only makes a red Pinot once a decade when it's warm enough. While I agree with you that there are a great many California Pinot vineyards that only make good Pinot in cooler years, and some that never will, you exhibit a gross lack of understanding of the California climate. There are plenty of Pinot vineyards here that are cooler sites than the Willamette sites, and because we get rain much later, we can hang them to (in a relative sense) ripeness and, should the winemaker choose, (in a relative sense) over-ripeness. The Willamette can be damn hot in the summer.

[Adam Lee]

Keith,

And therein lies the problem. You believe that it is perfectly reasonable to post that I am attempting to "delegitimize (other) domestic wineries....." Tell me how that is reasonable or reflects what I have done my entire career.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Adam:

I've no real desire to interject myself between you and Keith, but I feel compelled to ask.... do you think it unreasonable of Brian to do pretty much the same thing by calling the use of the term "natural" by some producers an intentional, direct marketing attack on other wineries?

Bruce,

Let me give you an example of website you should look at. The website is: http://laclarinefarm.com/La_Clarine_Farm/Welcome.html
On this website Hank Beckmeyer, who posts here frequently, and with whom I have had some spirited discussions -- describes his wines, how he grows the grapes, and how he makes the wines. He does so by saying he makes the wines "as naturally as possible" - and then goes on to list, rather specifically, what that constitutes to him. He never resorts to describing what other people are doing as "winemaking tricks" or "manipulation" nor does he describe other wines as "cocktails" or "rocket fuel." You can read that he is proud of what he does -- but doesn't turn that into an attack on others Hank's website is a shining example for all of us to follow - as an example of spelling out what you do without comparing it to any one else. Yes, he uses the term "naturally" but I dont believe that is, in the context of the rest of the site, any type of insult. --- I do think, however, the term can be used as an attack on others based on the context of the remark.

Does that make any sense?

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Jim Swayze]

Since it is not hard, prove to me, on a macro level, that California Pinot Noirs require more adjustments than Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noirs.

Well, first, do you agree in principle with the concept that grapes grown in the wrong area have characteristics that tempt the technologically adept to use artificial methods of correction?

[Adam Lee]

Since it is not hard, prove to me, on a macro level, that California Pinot Noirs require more adjustments than Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noirs.

Well, first, do you agree in principle with the concept that grapes grown in the wrong area have characteristics that tempt the technologically adept to use artificial methods of correction?

Jim,

I believe that grapes in any area may need corrections of some sort. Some of these areas may be "wrong" and some of them may be "right" -- but still need correction for some reason. And I guess I would say that it tempts both the technologically adept and well as those less adept.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Kevin Harvey]

One more point of clarification. I don't believe that Burgundy is the only place that greatness can be achieved with the Pinot noir grape. We just haven't figured it out yet outside of France. Maybe there is a Russian River site that will offer up the necessary (but not sufficient) materials for great Pinot noir. Maybe it's sitting right there on the land at Rhys. But I think the chances are that most of California is just too hot. Better chance is in Oregon, in my humble opinion and in the opinion of quite a few others greater than me whose opinion I respect.

Jim,
California has some climates that are cooler than Oregon (or Burgundy). If you would like to compare them, here is a link - http://www.rhysvineyards.com/pinot_mapping/index.php. Take a look at Falstaff Rd (Sonoma Coast) versus Salem.

Overall, I think the Burgundians would consider an emphasis on climate to be missing the point. They are much more focused on soil and California has some great examples...

[Berry Crawford]

Overall, I think the Burgundians would consider an emphasis on climate to be missing the point. They are much more focused on soil and California has some great examples...

You can't discount weather though. Look at 2003. From what I can tell Pinot gets roasted and/or muddy flavors if the weather gets too hot.

[Kevin Harvey]

Overall, I think the Burgundians would consider an emphasis on climate to be missing the point. They are much more focused on soil and California has some great examples...

You can't discount weather though. Look at 2003. From what I can tell Pinot gets roasted and/or muddy flavors if the weather gets too hot.

I don't discount weather (though it is over-emphasized) but it's important perspective to note that the 74.3F mean temperature that Burgundy suffered in August '03 is virtually unheard of in California Pinot country. A 69F mean temperature for a month is about as hot as I have ever seen for CA Pinot.

[Emilio Castelli]

Let me give you an example of website you should look at. The website is: http://laclarinefarm.com/La_Clarine_Farm/Welcome.html

Ah, a Fukuoka follower...clearly an enlightened individual...

I believe that grapes in any area may need corrections of some sort. Some of these areas may be "wrong" and some of them may be "right" -- but still need correction for some reason.

Here I don't understand you at all.
E

[Bruce G]

Bruce,

Let me give you an example of website you should look at. The website is: http://laclarinefarm.com/La_Clarine_Farm/Welcome.html
On this website Hank Beckmeyer, who posts here frequently, and with whom I have had some spirited discussions -- describes his wines, how he grows the grapes, and how he makes the wines. He does so by saying he makes the wines "as naturally as possible" - and then goes on to list, rather specifically, what that constitutes to him. He never resorts to describing what other people are doing as "winemaking tricks" or "manipulation" nor does he describe other wines as "cocktails" or "rocket fuel." You can read that he is proud of what he does -- but doesn't turn that into an attack on others Hank's website is a shining example for all of us to follow - as an example of spelling out what you do without comparing it to any one else. Yes, he uses the term "naturally" but I dont believe that is, in the context of the rest of the site, any type of insult. --- I do think, however, the term can be used as an attack on others based on the context of the remark.

Does that make any sense?

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Adam:

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Yes, it makes very good sense (even if it fails to answer the question directly ).
I thought Brians point a bit of an over-stretch, while I found Keith's to be less so. Perhaps my own biases were showing there.

Cheers,

[Tim Burnett]

Why are we talking about Burdundy vs. Cali Pinot in a natural wine thread?

I guess it was a hop, skip or a jump from the charge that “un-natural” techniques are necessary because CA is the wrong place to grow pinot, but I thought a lot of new oak and chaptalization in cooler years are fairly standard in Burdundy?

[Rick Gregory]

You're stating your opinions as if they were absolutes. They're not. They're YOUR opinion. Keep that in mind and try not to pretend that what you think is, of course, the ultimate truth.

Where we are really confused as moderns is in our lack of understanding that aesthetics can be both subjective and objective. We've been taught above all else the virtue of openness, that everything's subjective, a simple matter of taste. We are taught that truth is relative.

But it's ain't always so. The truth is that most of the Pinot sites in California are too hot for the grape, produce wines with too much alcohol, requiring too much intervention to correct, and/or lacking appropriate subtlety. These are generalizations, yes, but are are not hard to prove on the macro level. Of course counter examples do exist on the micro level.

So... prove it. You dodged that when Adam asked it... go ahead and 'prove' this. Not your OPINION about a site or wine, but proof. I'll accept general consensus from a broad range of diverse palates as proof. Note the words 'broad' and 'diverse' - no picking 1 or 2 people.

Don't dodge please - you're the one claiming this is objectively provable, so show us that " most of the Pinot sites in California are too hot for the grape" - and note that simply because someone lets the grape hang until it's practically a raisin doesn't mean the SITE needs requires that.

[Adam Lee]

I believe that grapes in any area may need corrections of some sort. Some of these areas may be "wrong" and some of them may be "right" -- but still need correction for some reason.

Here I don't understand you at all.
E[/quote]

Emilio,

I will give you some examples if you would like -- but would like to hear back on my question to Jim before I do so. Alternatively, Emilio, you always know how to reach me!

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Richard T r i m p i]

Godwin's Law of Wine Threads: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Burgundy and non-Burgundy Pinot Noir approaches 1."

There seems to be a tricky balancing act between wineries/winemakers who may not necessarily want to be extolled as "natural", yet don't seem to want to be excluded. Worst of all would be a designation of "artificial" or "industrial".

It's a little puzzling as a lot of "natural wine" (thinking about the Paris wine bar boom) could be described as spritzy poorly made schlock. The last one I tasted was more like de-alched Jaegermeister than Grenache. I've been avoiding Cotturis for years (although applaud their efforts). Brilliant exceptions not withstanding, does the average "natural wine" really taste better? Have tank farm producers been slipping in trans-fat or PCBs to make their bulk juice taste Pinot-like enough to falsify the label?

RT

[Ian Brand]

Not to belittle Mr. Beckmeyer or his work, but I did note that some of his wines receive a "light filtration". Does this exclude him from the 'natural winemaking' movement?

[H Wallace Jr]

It's a little puzzling as a lot of "natural wine" (thinking about the Paris wine bar boom) could be described as spritzy poorly made schlock...

As opposed to the well made schlock that lines the shelves at the supermarket?

The last one I tasted was more like de-alched Jaegermeister than Grenache.

Was it spritzy too? If so, that actually sounds semi tasty...

Brilliant exceptions not withstanding, does the average "natural wine" really taste better?

No. I'd say you've got these mofo's nailed down.

[Jim Swayze]

I believe that grapes in any area may need corrections of some sort. Some of these areas may be "wrong" and some of them may be "right"

Let me rephrase to confirm. Do you agree that there is a positive correlation between the “wrongness” of the land vis a vis that particular grape and the need for manipulation? Put another way, wouldn’t the perfect terroir to grow Pinot noir produce fruit so good that the winemaker needs to do very little, if anything, in the way of manipulation?

[Kevin Harvey]

Put another way, wouldn’t the perfect terroir to grow Pinot noir produce fruit so good that the winemaker needs to do very little, if anything, in the way of manipulation?

I think that (and the ability to produce consistent quality) is a good measure of the ability of a site. It is a large factor in how the Burgundians classify their own terroir.
That said, if you use it, you will not find support for your claims above (unless of course you decide not to pay attention to practices like chaptalization).

[Jim Swayze]

And then, Jim, there is a vineyard near Point Reyes that only makes a red Pinot once a decade when it's warm enough. While I agree with you that there are a great many California Pinot vineyards that only make good Pinot in cooler years, and some that never will, you exhibit a gross lack of understanding of the California climate. There are plenty of Pinot vineyards here that are cooler sites than the Willamette sites, and because we get rain much later, we can hang them to (in a relative sense) ripeness and, should the winemaker choose, (in a relative sense) over-ripeness. The Willamette can be damn hot in the summer.

Ian, you've been making some good points and I've been inadvertently ignoring you. Sorry.

No doubt there are pockets of California sites that are even cooler climate than the average northern Williamette Valley site. I have been talking on the macro scale.

Let me confirm this. Is there anyone who disagrees with the assertion that California Pinot noir -- on a macro level -- is grown on sites hotter than Oregon?

[Bill Tex Landreth]

Let me confirm this. Is there anyone who disagrees with the assertion that California Pinot noir -- on a macro level -- is grown on sites hotter than Oregon?

With my admitted minimal knowledge of pinot, I would have to agree that big picture you are correct.

[Adam Lee]

I have to agree with Kevin. The ability to produce consistently excellent wines is how you measure a site.

But I don't know why you are going at it from this point of view. We aren't discussing "perfect terroirs" (as if such things even exist). The question was supposedly simple to answer, "prove to me, on a macro level, that California Pinot Noirs require more adjustments than Burgundy or Oregon Pinot Noirs."

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Keith Levenberg]

I've had some pretty amazing pinots from Champagne and the Loire with listed alcohols between 11.5% and 12.5%, levels that would prompt chaptalization in Burgundy. But the thing is, those low alcohol levels resulted in astonishingly elegant wines. Even if Burgundy would not ripen at those levels, I do think it can be said that just because someone does chaptalize doesn't mean they need to, and I suspect I'd often prefer they didn't. Sometimes as little as a half a degree of alcohol makes the difference between a seamless, flawlessly balanced wine and one that seems just a little awkward. I also think a lot of chaptalization is done in Burgundy to make the fermentation go easier and not because anyone made a deliberate aesthetic judgment that the wine needed more alcohol to come into balance.