If you hate riesling so much, stay the hell away from it. Nobody is forcing you to love the grape.
If you want something with screeching acidity, no fruit, and zero sugar, I’m sure there are plenty of people making wines that would suit your palate.
Adam, have you tried the trocken wines of Dr. Uli Stein?
Cooler-vintage Coteaux Champenois Blanc would probably be the best place to start. ![[snort.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/b/bdc3944606213c4dca6c1169cf0a166c8bc4f8c9.gif "snort.gif"){kind=small}
Yep. They are usually around 2-4g/l as far as I recall. Wonderful balanced wines.
As I’ve said before the wines Adam seeks don’t exist.
FWIW, I have not yet had a US Gruner that I thought was worth buying with my own money, despite trying several.
I don’t have a problem with wanting clearer residual sugar numbers on labels. I can definitely taste sweetness in a lot of trocken-labeled wines, although not really to this extreme.
I just think it’s ridiculous to act like you’ve been tricked by a dry labeling/description when you have posted several times about how descriptions of dryness hardly ever seem to match your palate
Got it, Stein wouldn’t work either. Perceptually dry and half dry kabinetten and spatlesen. Of the highest order I might add!
+1
But if you print a dryness scale on the label (which a lot of Alsatians do), then you’ve entered into an understanding with the consumer that the dry part of that scale represents “fermented to dryness” or close to zero sugar. It is very illogical to have the driest part of that scale represent some arbitrary sugar number instead.
My whole rant pertains to it being misleading, not the fact that wine has sugar in it.
You think the general consumer is thinking “fermented to dryness” when they even bother looking at the scale? Take off the winemaker/wine geek hat for a moment.
It’s not a logic thing. The dry part of that scale does represent close to zero sugar, but you just happen to disagree with the definition of “close to zero”.
But, I think you already knew that.
To me this just comes across as that’s as dry as they will make the wine. There is no 0 on that chart on the back of the bottle. The labeling laws for so many areas always leave a little room for imprecision.
Adam, are you wanting a wine with 0rs, or just a label that says as close as possible the rs?
Dry ≠ Zero sugar.
The basic approach is wrong.
I was always under the understanding that with the riesling ‘sweetness’ scale, ‘dry’ means that the combination of RS and total acidity bring it down to a specific level, NOT just the aggregate RS level. Is that still the case?
I do find rieslings to be a bit ‘tricky’ with regards to ‘sweetness levels’ as well, but have had plenty that were ‘trocken’ that were dry enough for me.
It also does sound like you are very sensitive to sweetness as well - perhaps moreso than others. May I ask how you drink your coffee?
Cheers.
If the label is IRF this is how its classified.
Riesling Sugar Guidelines: The Scale
The International Riesling Foundation supports four sweetness categories for Riesling, as set forth below, using no numbers to designate the various categories. They will be referenced only by the terms we used for each of the four categories.
Wineries are encouraged to use these categories on all their literature and labeling as well as verbally as a guide for wholesalers, retailers, restaurateurs and consumers.
In the following list, sugar and acid are listed in grams per liter.
Dry. All wines carrying this designation will have a sugar-to-acid ratio not exceeding 1.0. For example, a wine with 6.8 grams of sugar and 7.5 grams of acidity would be in the same category as a wine with 8.1 grams of sugar and 9.0 grams of acid. Similarly, a wine with 12 grams of sugar and 12 grams of acid would be classified as dry.
Notice also that wines that are totally or “near-totally” dry (such as 4 grams per liter) will have a much lower ratio. For instance, a wine with only 3 grams of sugar and a total acidity of 6 grams per liter will have a ratio of .5, and clearly the wine is dry.)
As to pH: we assume that the range of pHs for most Rieslings is between 2.9 and 3.4. So 3.1 is the “base” pH with which most wine makers will be working. So if the pH of wine is 3.1 or 3.2, it remains in this dry category. But if the pH is 3.3 or 3.4, it moves up to Medium Dry. (And if the pH is 3.5 or higher, the wine maker may wish to move the wine to Medium Sweet.)
Medium Dry. Here the ratio is 1.0 to 2.0 acid to sugar. Example: a wine with 7.5 grams of acid could have a maximum sugar level of 15.0 grams. And if the pH is above 3.3, it moves to Medium Sweet, and if the pH is as low as 2.9 or lower, the wine moves to Dry.
Medium Sweet. The ratio here is 2.1 to 4.0 acid to sugar. Example: a wine with 7.5 grams of acid could have a maximum sugar level of 30 grams. And again, the same pH factor applies as a level two wine: if the pH rises to 3.3, you move up to Dessert, and if the pH drops to 2.9 you move to Medium Dry. And if the pH is 2.8 or below (highly unlikely), the wine could be called Dry.
Sweet. Ratio above 4.1, but using the pH adjustment, a sweeter wine with a ratio of, say, 4.4 might actually be moved to Medium Sweet if the pH is significantly lower.
It is vital that all IRF members adhere to the same terminology so when we speak to Riesling consumers about what is a dry wine and what is a medium dry wine, we are all speaking the same language.
This guideline should assist restaurants in that servers can verbally tell patrons what style of wine they will be getting. The more it is used, the more the terminology will be understood.
It is highly recommended that this guideline be used in conjunction with the IRF’s approved graphic interpretation–the Riesling Taste Profile–which can be used on back labels, case cards, shelf-talkers, and so forth.
To me, this is akin to complaining that your Chinon has pyrazines, when once, in a warm vintage you had a Chinon from a different producer that didn’t. Pyrazines are a hallmark of the area/wine style, and it’s an anomaly when you get a wine from that region that doesn’t have that hallmark., much like at least a bit of RS is a hallmark of Riesling.
It’s also known that German producers will often call their wines “dry” when there are still a couple grams of residular sugar in the wine. “At Lauer, the focus is on dry-tasting Rieslings as opposed to the residual sugar wines of the latter. For this style, there are really only two addresses in the Saar (though more come online every year, trying to chase the style): Lauer and Hofgut Falkenstein.” “When the vintage allows it, Florian will craft Prädikat wines, the Kabinetts, Spät and Auslesen that we all know and once loved. As the focus of Lauer’s production is clearly on the dry and dry-tasting wines…” These are two quotes from Vom Boden, describing Lauer’s wines, emphasizing the word “dry” multiple times, though if you look at stats on the wines mentioned, there is residual sugar, ranging in amount from 1.1 grams to 6 grams.
just a suggestion, but have you tried the Immich-Batterieberg kabinett? aka kabinett trocken? it’s really bone dry and still with fruit. very nice wine and a door to close before you walk away from Germany
Rob,
I love the Immich-Batterieberg wines and agree they do come off dry-tasting, but fear that this may be a producer that Adam doesn’t approve of, as they do have wines that carry some RS. Even depending on vintage, that Kabinett Trocken we both love, is sometimes just called Kabinett. Take the following quote fromMosel Fine Wine about Immich, which reinforces my above point that even wines called “dry”, still often have residual sugar above the perceptible levels.
“The 2016er Enkircher Batterieberg Réserve comes from over 80 year -old un-graf ted vines in the terraced part of the vineyard and was fermented to legally dry levels (it has 7 g/l of residual sugar). It offers a gorgeous nose of white peach, vineyard peach, ginger and spices. The wine proves gorgeously playful and elegant on the palate and leaves a stunning feel of spices and whipped cream. The aftertaste is creamy, precise and seemingly endless. This is easily one of the f inest dry Riesling f rom the great 2016 vintage! 2027-2042”
I think the CAI still often has a smidge of RS
yes but I-B are so dry, to my palate, but still refreshing and juicy