Does Biodynamic taste better?

It is financially a risk when there is mildew and all the other diseases that can plague the wine grower. Pontet Canet and Palmer both lost a substantial percentage of wine in 2018.
Apart from being arguably healthier than organic for example, is there any actual improvement in taste, or in fact, it begs the obvious question, does it change the taste of the wine?

Unless someone out there produced wine from same rows, same vintage, same vinification down to barrels, but grown differently, how do you gauge it, one way or the other?

I believe that the primary benefit of Biodynamic farming practices is sustainability. I think it would be difficult to attribute changes in taste to these techniques.

Is there anything to back up this claim? Do you mean “healthier” for the plants, or for the drinkers? And I’m not even convinced that if copper sulfate is allowed, it’s “healthier” than many non-“organic” (in the non-chemistry sense of the word) mildew treatments.

Biodynamics are only healthier if voodoo is real.

Copper gets used in both biodynamic and organic viticulture.

As compared to organic, no, I doubt it. For a long time, it was best management to fumigate fields with 1,3-Dichloropropene or methyl bromide to treat for nematodes, which would almost sterilize the soil. I’d have to believe doing things to promote a healthy soil ecology, cover crops with deep roots, adding compost, and no chemicals, over time, does improve the quality of grapes? Grapes are weird though that good, deep, loamy soil, with broken up hardpan isn’t necessarily a positive. I also would promote ideas from permaculture (Wendell Berry and The Land Institute) as much better for the environment, in a holistic ecological sense, than biodynamic (Rudolf Steiner)–but there are no labeling laws for permaculture.

I would paint with a broad brush and say the “difference,” if there is any, is due to the amount of attention the vineyard receives. Vineyardists who pay the extra attention and money to grow organically and/or biodynamically are taking their work very seriously.

Probably not. But I have always assumed that if a producer went to the trouble of biodynamic they are going to put as much effort elsewhere in the wine’s production. And that they are trying, like organic & sustainable, to do right by the land and environment. Copper sulfate issue or not. I’ve had biodynamic tomatoes and I can’t say I tasted any difference there, either.

There is something to be said for this. It’s not a universal truth, but it often holds true.

Here’s my rant on Biodynamics. I have no problems with the regular additions of micronutrients to the soil, nor the inoculations with microorganisms. Not even the timing with the phases of the moon. I do have a problem with the nonscientific explanations. But my biggest problem is as follows. My favorite vineyards are those with high biodiversity. Vines, yes. But also multiple types of grasses, wild flowers, thistles, interplanted trees and bushes. Many, many insects along with reptiles, some mammals, birds. Raptors soar overhead. These are true ecosystems. Those vineyards I dislike are a monoculture of vines, maybe one or two cover crops. The former vineyards have a rich microflora in the soil. Biodynamic or not. The later probably requires biodynamics with the constants additives to the soil just to maintain a decent microflora. Such vineyards are, in the end, nonsustainable. Biodynamics is required to get something good out of the soil.

I’ve noticed that you get better tasting fruits and vegetables when shopping in the organic aisle. Let’s face it. Tomatoes, strawberries and many other fruits were starting to taste like cardboard. I cannot say why organic produce tastes better, but I think Merrill is on to something.The farmer has to pay more attention, perhaps restrict yields etc .

A friend likes to say the wine is made in the vineyard and ruined in the winery and that could happen to organically/biodynamically grown grapes.

Years ago Lalou gave a talk about bio dynamics at the International Pinot Noir Celebration in Mc Minnville. She went on about burying a horn full of poop under a full moon etc.
Somebody asked her about barrels. She said they were just accessories. Somebody later asked me the same question. I said the salesmen were full of BS, the coopers were horny, but the trees were as biodynamic/organic as you could get.

Mark, I am not sure I can answer your question sincerely. As much as I never score wines, I am not sure subjectively (or objectively?) I can measure whether the answer is yes or no. I then land in what Merrill said, as well as Mel: the question I ask differently is does this approach matter to you or not. In that question, it does. My wife and I eat nearly everything organic at home. The champagne I buy (and now domestically the still wine I buy), this approach has become a buying choice for me, a go/no go differentiator. But, to answer the question you posed in this thread, so I have to say “I am not sure” but will say organic/biodynamic are the wines I want to buy and drink and I vote those with my wine budget, for sure.

Merrill has it right.

If you believe in biodynamie, then you do. But if you don’t, yet notice an awful lot of biodynamic wines that are particularly interesting vs. their neighbors, then you ignore the mysticism and look at the practice. And the fact is that an obsessive concentration on vineyard health can’t be anything but good for the wine, as long as the cellar practices aren’t deformative. Biodynamic producers are forced to obsess about their vines.

And yes, copper sulfate is awful.

Of course, otherwise why would people follow it?

As several have pointed out, there are loopholes and short-falls of certified biodynamic and organic practices. Maybe for a time they were at the cutting edge - an important reaction to terrible practices that had become the norm. But, there’s been more and more scientific understanding. A one-size-fits-all check sheet, with no latitude is a half-assed approach. Of course I’m not saying organic and biodynamic growers are doing the bare minimum and have a weak understanding of their land. I’m saying so many are so far beyond the bare minimum. I’ll also say many who could never qualify for certification are using best-for-their-site practices in regard to sustainability, quality, eco-friendliness and so forth.

A healthy soil makes nutrients and micro nutrients available to the vines. That contributes to vine health (incl. vine longevity), fermentation health. and probably increased potential for complexity. I’ve tasted the results from some vineyards that made that transformation. Going from very problematic sticky ferms making ho-hum wine to easy no-add ferms making highly impressive wines. (With the winemaking improvements coming first and the soil health taking years, it’s easy to say around two-thirds of that dramatic improvement was in the vineyard.)

Biodiversity adds to complexity. Obviously nearby plants can contribute volatile oils to the grapes. There are all sorts of plant relationships that contribute to vine and soil health, defenses against pests and diseases, and so forth. Cover crops of various types serve all sorts of roles. Nearby plants can provide habitat for beneficial insects.

There’s been some studies of microflora that live on the grape skins actually interacting with the grapes, contributing to flavor diversity. That’s come up in terroir discussions here. So, a healthy ecosystem on the grapes contributes to potential wine complexity. Various yeast species living on the grapes will be what starts a “natural” fermentation. That can add to complexity. Having nearby plants that Saccharomyces cerevisiae thrive living on (they love oak, btw) should mean some diversity of wine yeast are in from the start and can build up and try to compete with those that are incidentally or intentionally introduced.

While I’m rambling, I just heard about a natural concoction someone with philoxera issues is using. Apparently the lice don’t like it and it seriously suppresses their spread.

+1

+2

I’m not a believer in the root day, flower day mumbo-jumbo but the meticulous care of the vineyard and maintenance of a healthy biome can make a real difference.

Moral superiority can taste awfully good to some.

Only if you believe it does.

I’ve never really understood the difference between organic and biodynamic, but I’m certainly in favour of organic farming and wine-making, because it’s clearly better for the environment and my experience has shown that the products taste better. Many producers in the Loire valley have been doing it since long before it became fashionable, like Huet for example, and the results speak for themselves. In Champagne, the soils are only just recovering from decades of toxic waste being use as “fertilizer”. In Bordeaux, if large businesses such as Palmer and Pontet-Canet are doing it, it can’t be just for the image. True, the risks can be high, but it must make sense to them.