It has been done for winemaking for thousands of years, by many of the greatest producers, and causes no health problems. No reason for it to be illegal.
There are a LOT of sugar additions already going on in California. Has anyone heard of anyone being busted for it? Seems very silly to me that it is illegal. I doubt much would change if the law were to change. Perhaps only for the really big mass producers, as they are probably under more scrutiny.
This comment alone deserves its own thread.
Yes
If deciding it would be better to chaptalize is essentially the same, then Henri Jayer and Jacques Seysses have… ![[berserker.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/8600bbd4810d342b8fbd4ffb62b4f0026275fd37.gif "berserker"){kind=small}
It’s done here in Oregon and no one cares, why not make it legal in California?
Forgive my ignorance, but what does chaptalization do to wine flavors and aromas? Wouldn’t it just all convert to alcohol? If so, what’s the point of that?
The % ABV affects the balance of the wine and has an effect on how aromas and flavors are perceived.
As California growers push to the colder areas of the state the winemakers should have available the same techniques as winemakers in similar climates. Whether they decide to use those techniques is up to them and may become apparent in the overall wine quality. The problem is that chaptalization is legal in California already, only in the more obtrusive form of concentrate.
That seems to be exactly the point. Not long ago it was normal for people to drink 10-11% ABV wine, then 12% became the minimum for anything decent, now it’s almost obligatory to hit 13-14%+.
I’m sure the Burgundian domaines (e.g. Dujac) that reportedly chaptalize every vintage have their reasons to do so besides increasing alcohol. I’ve read it’s about prolonging the fermentation but I’m not sure what advantage that provides…
When thoughtful producers like Jacques Seysses make a decision, it’s probably for good reason.
I also have serious doubts that much if any of the great wine people have been drinking for the last 100 years was in the 11-12% alcohol range. I’m not sure where that idea became commonplace (at least on this board and in certain NY circles), but I haven’t heard it from any winemaker.
Whether and when it’s a good idea is above my wine intelligence, but it really should be a production choice, not a regulatory issue. I highly doubt we’re saving any mass producers from themselves
Do you think the 10-11% holds true for red wines?
If so, when was this?
Where?
(Not giving you a hard time. Actually looking for info that is new to me.)
In distillation it is said that adding sugars to fruit mash dilutes the concentration of the final product. It is used to raise the ABV and essentially aid in the final alcohol harvested but doesn’t offer anything valuable in the way of flavor
BlakeGray had a rather inane blog on the subject today, so thought I’d add my opinions. They’re free, of course, and worth every cent.
Some 10-12 yrs ago, I was doing a vertical tasting w/ the grower of Syrahs produced from his (very cold-climate) Syrah vnyd.
He was regaling me w/ the SaH and TA at harvest numbers. This one Syrah, maybe the '98, was harvested at 18.2 (or thereabouts) Brix
as that was all they could get it to ripen to. I looked at the label and noticed it was 14.6% alcohol (assuming that figure was accurate…and
this winemaker is a pretty concientous winemaker). Hmmm…musta been some sizable amounts of C&H involved here. This Syrah was
exceptional, one of the best of that vertical. The evil use of C&H had resulted in a pretty profound Syrah that I doubt would have been nearly as
good w/o its use. The terroir of this cold-climate vnyd was not in the least marred by the C&H…at least that I could tell.
So, I say let the winemakers in Calif chaptalize if they feel the need to do so, to make a better wine. And don’t require them to put it on
the label…the labels are already too cluttered w/ stuff (“warm days and cool nights”…yada yada yada), mostly marketing BS.
Let them acknowledge it on their WebSites if they so choose to do. Most of the winemakers I know of who might chaptalize are
pretty free about letting their customers know what they used in their winemaking.
My recollect is that the “no chaptalization” was passed at the behest of independent grape growers in the SanJoaquinVlly who
were worried/threatened by wineries taking underripe grapes (and thereby avoiding the higher costs associated by the “sugar bonuses”)
and adding sugar to get the desired alcohol level.
PaulDraper tells the story of once (in the '70’s) driving into Robert vonWeidlich’s vnyd to take the Zinfandel for their long-departed
Occidental Zin and catching him throwing handfulls of C&H onto the grapes in the picking lugs. They later dropped his vnyd because
of the difficulty they had in getting those Zin grapes to ripen. 'Tis a pity…it’s an exceptional vnyd.
One question, though. If somebody chaptalized w/ corn syrup, say (can’t imagine why you’d use corn syrup). Most corn products (think Fritos)
these days come from GMO corn. Could somebody analyze the wine and tell that a GMO product was introduced in its winemaking??
Tom
Lots of Beet Sugar is GMO too, I think.
Personally, I am not a fan of GMO.
Why not?
Sorry for the thread drift…
Much of GMO is designed to sell patented herbicide resistant seed that goes with increased use of the same company’s herbicide. The primary purpose is profit for the company that holds the patent on the seed and the herbicide.
They sell it like they are solving the world’s problems, but from what I can gather, most small farmers around the world don’t want this stuff. Plus, the pollen escapes and gets into the seed stock of farmers that are trying to maintain heirloom seeds.
As an example, in your salad tonight, would you prefer you lettuce to be organically grown, or would you rather a special lettuce that is roundup ready, so the farmer can use big doses of roundup and not kill the lettuce?
BTW, I suspect that roundup kills lettuce, but I don’t know. I’ve never used it.
It sounds like you have an issue with Monsanto and patents (which any thinking person should). But that shouldn’t be the same as being anti GMO.
Anyone who is trying to capture seeds will have issues with pollination from outside sources whether the source is GMO or not.
Well as someone who lives in a rich industrialized nation with no food access problems, I will take the organic heirloom variety. Preferably one Ive grown mysef with no sprays at all. But if Im a villager in a 3rd world country struggling for survival I want to most productive crop.
Personally I am not sure where I stand on GMOs on a macro level as I simply don’t feel I have enough information to make a reasoned opinion (and Im not anyone does at this point) but check out the following article about a well know environmentalist who changed his mind about GMOs. Its food for thought: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/whats-changing-minds-on-gmos.html
This is obviously getting off topic by to tie this back to the OP and wine in general, I think its important to view things from a fact-based perspective. Opinions on things like GMOs and capitalization should be based on science and not emotion IMO.