Eucalyptus, garrigue, and other wine flavoring additives

WINE TALK
41

I think the brilliance of wine from grapes is that you don’t need to add anything. You don’t need to add olives to Syrah, black pepper to Mourvèdre, essence of cherry to Pinot Noir. You could, but you could also grind up Wagyu A5 strip steaks for burgers, but why?

The environmental examples you list - eucalyptus near a vineyard - aren’t the same. Intention matters - were the trees planted for the effect or are they just there? But even if so, when the trees are gone, can you still make Martha’s Vineyard wine? Of course you can. But good luck with your Kriek without the cherry flavoring.

Basically, grapes are special.

42

UC Davis Viticulture Cat Does Not Approve!

43

Getting back to the original OP, I’m not sure where the idea started to not allow most of the additives you’ve mentioned in wine - my guess is that it had more to do with ‘protectionism’ and ‘controlling counterfeiting’ than anything else.

And I am personally ‘not offended’ by these types of wines - they are not for me but if that’s what it takes for someone to ‘enjoy wine’, I’m all for it.

As far as these types of additives that are used in beer and distilled spirits - it certainly sets them apart and allows for so much more flexibility in styles that can be created. This ‘flexibility’, along with the feeling that beer and distilled spirits are not ‘pompous’, certainly has a lot to do with the rapid growth in these other categories.

I can see how beer ‘purists’ take issue with these types of additives, but hey, it’s beer [snort.gif] [soap.gif] [stirthepothal.gif]

44

Exactly so. Even post-Roman, there is a long history of wine adulteration - everything from fakery to “improvement”. This got particularly bad in France post-phylloxera when decent wine was in short supply, and the AOC system was introduced to counter this. So if you wanted the right to put Appellation Contrôlée on your label, you had to conform to the rules. Then other countries introduced their own standards.

But flavoured wines do exist. Retsina is a Traditional (i.e not area-based) Greek Appellation for wine flavoured with pine resin. You can also get chocolate-flavoured wine, and there must be other ones. I am not sure how these products are regulated, and what they can be called, but they certainly exist. Oh, and vermouths are based on fortified wines with botanicals too. Also Barolo Chinato, which has its own DOCG.

I guess flavoured wines will be made to the extent that the market supports them.

45

I think we’ll see more and more of this due to the success that these other alcoholic products are having with them over the past decade.

Heck, the bourbon barrel aged wine would probably never have come about if not for the success of both craft bourbon and, more importantly, bourbon barrel aged stouts and porters.

Of course, some could make the argument that some of these ‘attempts’ are probably best left in the lab . . .

46

Cmon
If more than grapes are included it should clearly be described on the FRONT label
Do not drink any bottles without this assurance, because it is not wine

47

I think it’s because most of the people drinking “fine” wine today, and most of the people on this board, haven’t had much wine with additives. Because they haven’t had it, they think it is wrong.

As pointed out by a few others, there is a history of adding things to wine. Not wood chips, tannins, etc., that are supposed to mimic other flavors, but actual flavoring compounds that are supposed to be themselves.

In Uruguay they make wines like that - herb infused wines and I like that they’re not religious about it.

The notion of grapes as some unique expression of a piece of land is pretty recent after all. In the past people knew that some places produced better grapes than others, based only on the few grapes and varieties that they had in that specific region, but the grapes weren’t celebrated as expressing terroir or anything else. That’s all pretty modern. Those grapes were grown for wine. If your grapes got ripe enough each year to make a decent wine, you were happy and you liked that spot.

Most of the laws regarding what’s allowed to be grown in an area weren’t written because those particular grapes made better wine than anything else, they were written because the locals wanted to restrict things to what they had at the moment.

When did those rules start appearing? Rome once banned imports from Gaul to protect their own wine producers. More recently, in the mid 1700s the good folks in Bordeaux who owned the major trading houses banned wine from outside the region from being brought in. But producers continued to add as necessary - the wine just couldn’t be bulked in and sold off directly. The banning of Syrah only came about in the 1930s, mostly in response to the depression and WWII. Spain, France, Germany and Italy all modified or adopted rules in the 1970s that defined what the American market was to learn.

After those laws were passed and people in the US became familiar with those rules, we decided that’s how the world is supposed to be. Much later, as marketing, people started talking about the grapes as an expression of the land and vineyards because anyone can grow Cabernet Sauvignon. To make mine special I have to tell you about some stones or a large outcropping near the vineyard, or something else.

So to answer the question Chris posed - there’s absolutely nothing wrong with adding a bit of orange zest or rosemary or anything else to wine. It simply goes against what we’re accustomed to today and what we think is the correct order of the world.

As for grapes being special - so is everything. Onions from one farm, olives from another, apples from another and cherries from another. All are just as different as grapes when compared side by side. ALso cheese from one hillside in the spring vs the same in the fall vs the one on the other side of the hill. Most people don’t want to pay attention to those things so they are happy with industrial production, but many people are also happy with industrial production of wine, or else Yellow Tail and Meiomi wouldn’t sell so many bottles.

48

Good thread Chris. I’ve wondered about this over the years many times. Especially in reference to a wine like old Heitz Martha’s. Is that Euc oil terroir or an additive? Is botrytis terroir or an additive?

I don’t have any problems with additives as long as they are disclosed. I would most likely skip any of them like I do most beer with something thrown into it. It’s just not something I’m looking for or have trained myself to enjoy.

It fell out of fashion for dry table wines to be ‘adulterated’ in any way and we’ve come to think of them for lesser wines or other sorts of drinks. As others have mentioned throughout history it was common to have makers adding flavors and we have many examples even today. It should be fine to make new examples.


[suicide.gif]

49

French oak water-based concentrate


~ For HARVEST TANNIN ( H.T ) :
Water based tannin concentrate : 120 g tannin/ L,
Appr. 1/2 L will treat 200 gal of wine must or 1 ton of grapes.
Packed in 25 L or 50 Gal Drum container. It is less aggressive than dry tannin and gives a smoother finish.

~ For POST FERMENTATION TANNIN:
At the recommended rate the cost to treat a wine varies from 5 cts / gal of wine.

  • Fruit Enhancer (FEN):
    80 gr/ tannin /L, dose appr.1 L /1000 L wine
    Your cost is about 12 cts / Gallon wine
    -reduce vegetative character, give a smooth core to wine

  • Mocha Chocolate:
    10 gr / tannin /L dose appr. 1 L / 1000 L wine
    Bring a touch of nutty chocolate

  • Fire Toast :
    25 gr/ tannin / L dose appr. 1 L / 1000 L
    While softening the wine it adds a touch of light oak smoke.

  • Vanilla XA: 80 gr/ tannin / L

  • works best on white, give a very smooth creamy core to wine
    Appr.1 Liter will treat 5 to 10000 L wine: about 5 cts to 10 cts / Gallon

  • OAK .CHERYWOOD: 80 gr/tannin/L A

  • The fruity style has a strong influence the existing character of the wine
    Starting ratio ; 1/1000 L -wine

With all concentrate the ratio is so little that it is not a substitue for traditional oak, it is more a structure and mouthfeel adjustment.

All Oak concentrates have been approved by the TTB.

50

Great episode, underrated show. I’ve been searching for it for years but apparently there is some dispute over the rights that keeps it off of Amazon/Netflix, etc. What was the wine they had to reproduce?

Something to consider is that flavored anything is usually not very good, at least IMO. As has been mentioned, it is grapes’ ability to manifest so many unique flavors when fermented that makes it so fascinating. Maybe this is all imagination and pretense but there’s a subtly to the way that non-grape fruit flavors and non-fruit flavors present in wine that makes those flavors feel an authentic expression. I can’t think of tasting any products with added flavors (which usually means artificial flavors) that taste as though they belong in the product. So the result is always a concoction, whereas wine seems a singular product rather than a sum of miscellaneous parts. I’m probably not explaining this as well as I’d like, but my feeling is that wine with added flavors will inevitably feel like a cocktail or a product and will not be “wine.”

51

Agreed, excellent show, great episode. It was a 1929 Latour.

52

I generally agree. One of the main answers to the question I posed was that great grapes and great winemakers don’t need to add things. Monprivato tastes like cherries, roses and tar without needing cherries, roses and tar added to it.

BUT, I think it’s a fair question whether Martha’s Vineyard tastes better before or after the eucalyptus grove was removed. I think most people think before. And other people like pine and garrigue additions that come into grapes from adjoining fauna, on legitimate wines. I’m not talking crap chocolate wine and almond sparklers here.

So it doesn’t seem out of the question that some good wines could become better with a flavor additive. Could you add pine resin or nutmeg or orange peel to a pinot and have it improve? I don’t know. Maybe.

Great discussion, everyone, and thanks for being thoughtful rather than dogmatic here.

53

Agreed.

Something to consider is that flavored anything is usually not very good, at least IMO.

Michael - I agree completely when it comes to artificial flavorings. Except you can use artificial vanilla in baking and your stuff will be OK.

But “natural” flavoring is different. I don’t care for mint but like the idea of mint and chocolate. Most of it tastes terrible - Andes mints, etc. That’s because they use some kind of oil. Then I became friendly with one of the world’s great chocolate makers. He gave me a mint truffle. It was perfection. So I asked him how he had done it - I had this idea that if you took fresh mint leaves and put them in your cream before using it for ganache, it would work. I asked him if he did something like that and he smiled and said that’s exactly what he did. You could do the same with orange peel, etc. And if you think about it, that’s what you do when you’re cooking - add a few herbs and spices and other items. So unlike the “hazelnut” flavored coffee people serve, you can do it in a way that may enhance, rather than destroy, whatever it is you’re making.

I also grew up drinking unflavored wine and I’m not sure I’d be a fan - the few retsinas I’ve tasted weren’t too good. But I did taste a lot of wine from Uruguay and thought it was fascinating and I’ve tasted a few in CA - pet projects of a winemaker here and there. I think it is an area that could be explored.

54

I agree with your chocolate experience.

I like to ‘pre-soak’ some rosemary in my cream and make rosematy ice cream. Nummy.

55

Greg, Retsina popped into my head pretty early in this discussion.

I have heard that there’s some good wines out there, but I think I was scarred by the cheap-o stuff years ago, and it would take a lot of cajoling to make me give it another taste.

56

Thank you for finding that!!! [cheers.gif]

It came specially all the way from France.
Do you have the label? I saved the whole bottle.
Fill it up with something else.
Nobody’ll know.
He’s an expert, he’ll be able to tell.
And then he’s gonna kill me.
Look, I once substituted lawn clippings for dill weed.
Adam said it was my best vinaigrette yet.
And you know how sensitive his palate is.

So, you think I could, like, fake Maurice out? Make him think it was his 1929 Latour? Chateau Latour? Yeah.
Yeah, is that bad? Well, gee, '29.

Shelly, peat moss, please.
Isn’t this dirt? Holling pots his crocuses in it.
It’ll lend sediment and a nice earthy undertone.
Well? It’s close.
Vanilla.
Vanilla.
Pepper.
Are you sure this is gonna work? Shelly, I once polished off a quart of Adam’s I was waiting for blood results, I was tense.
All they had at the corner store, was Clan McGregor.
I put in a little liquid smoke a dash of Chanel No.
5 and this is brilliant sandalwood incense.
Adam never suspected.
Of course, that wasn’t a '29 Latour.
Hmm.
What? What’s wrong? Let’s try a little more of the green food coloring.
God.
Blowing $4,000 on the Home Shopping Network that was one thing.
At least I have a diamond tiara to show for it, but this This stupid bottle of wine.
Holling’s gonna throw a rod.

There.
A good deep color with a plummy veneer and a velvety nose.
Huh.
It does kind of look like it looked before.

I’ve managed to cellar some rather interesting Sonoma cabs since the last feed.
My, my, my.
Wonders never cease, Minnifield.
This is incredible, Maurice.
I mean, I knew you collected, but I didn’t know it was anything like this.
Yeah, the climate in here is digitally controlled.
The humidity only varies less than one percent.
'61 Mouton-Rothschild.
Boy, that’s a good Bordeaux year.
You know, Broadbent gives this wine five stars.
Yeah, that’s the best vintage since '45.
Or '29.
Yeah.
You know what '61 I like? Ducru-Beaucaillou Bordeaux.
Oh, yes, dry and cedary.
Nice nose.
Good legs.
Ducru-Beaucaillou? It’s a little boutique vineyard.
I think I first tasted it at Dr.
Richele’s tasting in Pensacola in '86.
I had it at a Tannin tasting, '78.
Yeah, how did it hold up? Some color loss, it was peaked.
It was past its prime.
Yeah, that’s why I didn’t bid on it.

I offer you the pride of my cellar.
The first taste of a '29 Latour.
A wine as pure as nature itself.
Hmm.
Full-figured, peppery plummy veneer.
Velvety nose.
Rich color.
No fade.
Hmm.
Earthy undertones.
It’s It’s delicious.
Make sure everyone gets a taste.
Eat! Drink! Keep pulling those corks.
Cheers, everybody.
Thank you for being here! Cheers!

57

It’s interesting to see so many people say they’re against any sort of flavor additives. I am sure most or all of those people enjoy some wines that have been aged in a proportion of new oak, or at the very least barrels that have been used fewer than 3 times and impart noticeable flavor. Why doesn’t that count? Oak barrels have nothing to do with the natural flavor of grapes and fermentation.

58

If you ever get the chance to try Kechris “Tear of the Pine”, consider yourself cajoled a lot.

59

I’m glad you brought this up. I agree with you that most people enjoy the flavors that oak imparts on wine. Personally, I have a strong dislike for overt oak of most any kind and especially toasted oak aromas and flavors.

Shouldn’t we, as wine enthusiasts, strive to love wines that are free from flavors that are not borne of fermented grapes? I mean, where do you draw the line? Take vanilla, for example. I enjoy a vanilla milkshake once in a while, but I don’t want to taste it in a red wine. Most people seem to love it. Would you be OK with a winemaker adding a bottle of vanilla extract to a barrel of red wine prior to bottling? I know I wouldn’t. With the case of eucalyptus, at least in a sense that is the “terroir” of vineyard, though I think I would still prefer just the fermented grapes without any noticeable influence from surrounding trees and bushes.

60

Yet most red wines you buy and enjoy are aged in oak, and even if you don’t perceive “overt oak” or “toasted oak” or taste vanilla when you drink, the oak undoubtedly plays a significant role in how the wine tastes. Would Haut Brion, Mascarello, DRC or Montelena taste the same if they were fermented and aged solely in stainless steel or concrete? Would you like them as much?

If not, what you’re really saying is you like wines whose smell and flavor are influenced by oak, but you just want them influenced to a certain amount and in a certain way by the oak. Not that you want to just taste something which solely reflects the flavors of fermented vinifera grapes.

But I wasn’t really meaning to talk about oak with this thread. I was just trying to explore the reasons why flavoring additives to wine were always considered wrong, or at least wrong unless they were introduced unintentionally like eucalyptus, pine and garrigue. I agree with you, I wouldn’t prefer to buy wines where the winemaker dumped a bucket of black olives and bottle of eucalyptus oil into the fermenting tank, yet at the same time, I have no problem with garrigue in Rhone wines or eucalyptus in Martha’s Vineyard, so I wanted to try to understand why. In some better way than “just because of tradition” or “it’s just always been that way” or “that’s considered the right opinion to have.”

Frankly, I would be kind of interested just for the sake of intellectual curiosity to see what it would be like. What if you had a good quality Syrah and then added some bunches of lavender and a bucket of black olives into the fermentation tank. What would it taste like, and would it be better or worse than the same Syrah made without that. Again, I’m not really in favor of it, but I’m curious what it would be like. And if it turned out I liked it, how should I feel about that?