There are very few that I think pull this off.
Aubert Chardonnays for sure. They don’t do it every time, but those that seemed unbalanced have become harmonious with more cellar time, in my experience.
Cayuse – I guess I put this in the category. Yes, they can be super funky, but there’s always new world fruit and lots of it. Very low acidity a lot of times, too, yet still somehow balanced to my taste.
Calling Rajat Parr…Keep in mind that one mans balanced is another mans soupy mess. Most of the palates here that participate a lot are AFWE types (me included I guess) although I can appreciate the occasional blockbuster in the right circumstances with the right food. But when we talk about wine styles it’s like talking about what kind of sex you like, loud and noisy or delicate and slow with classical music in the back ground. We all have differing sensory preferences and thresholds. I think that this is why Parr eventually gave up the IPOB movement and events that advocated his approach.
I think what came out of IPOB was the trend toward lower alcohol, higher acid, food flexible winemaking that emphasized careful viticultural match of grapes to site in order to achieve a more “authentic” wine with minimal manipulation in the winery. Not really “natural” wine but carefully produced wine that walks the line between maximal flavor (ie not just high alcohol) and a certain kind of delicacy. At least that is what I seem to get from the wines that he and Sashi Moorman have produced.
You might want to search older threads here that involved the IPOB movement and had various participants. In theory, to me, any grape type can achieve “balance” if produced in a sensitive way. Alcohol is just one component. Wines can be out of balance if they are excessively acidic, tannic, etc. It would be interesting to get a poll on differing kinds and vintage ports, and those considered “balanced”. Probably the most manipulated kind of wine with high alcohol. Except of course that on the board practically no one discussed port anymore ![[cry.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/853b6e76c6e8406be77a6727c2a27ad1672678b3.gif "cry"){kind=small}
Cheers, good luck in pursuit of your own kind of “balance” in a new career. Just remember that if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him…
im assuming you mean labeled 15. because like all people, i assume you have drank dozens of wines labeled in the 14s that are in the 15s, and some that are in the 16s.
I have a few good examples for you:
Antica Terra - as big as PN comes, without being oaky messes.
Paul Lato - highly extracted, but very enjoyable. He’s mainly known for his PN’s, but I think his Syrah is the standout. All very nice.
Alban - huge Rhone rider, but always very well made.
All of these wines are obscenely priced in my view, but you could make an argument that they’re worth it once in awhile. But US wine pricing is one of my soap boxes that I’ll save for another time.
It’s interesting that you would mention Cayuse - and that the OP mentioned Epoch’s Tempranillo. I had a chance to try Cayuse’s Inpulsivo yesterday and, though a well made wine, there is no way in the world that I would pick this out as Tempranillo . . .
To me, that is the biggest challenge here - and I understand what the OP is asking - but so many new world renditions of varieties do not exhibit the ‘typicity’ that I look for in a variety from elsewhere. When I have a Grenache, I want it to remind me of a Grenache - not something else.
I therefore think it might be interesting to do this by variety - I’d be curious to see what renditions folks on here consider to show ‘terroir and typicity’ rather than ‘winemaker intent’ . . .
Cheers.
Dustin,
You preface your question with your desire to be a winemaker.
If that is truly your intent, my suggestion is you make what the vineyard gives you. Trying to follow an example will just give you a pretender to that style and the dirt and fruit you are working with isn’t the same.
Don’t start with a goal in mind, other than to make the truest expression of what you are given. Nobody else can do that.
Best, jim
Perhaps, and I’ll leave to people more knowledgeable than me on specific alcohol levels. From what I’ve heard the heat from alcohol gets very detectable on the palate around 15.2%, and gets more noticeable from there. I can’t recall having many wines labeled at 14% alcohol that seemed super hot, but have had plenty at 15%+ that I disliked. Usually won’t buy a wine that’s 15% on the label, but sometimes get random daily drinkers that are up there. Opened up a zin I got on last bottle a few weeks back, that the finish tasted like purple drank, and noticed it was 15.8%. I don’t think 16%+ is very common, certainly not in the new world wines I drink (I’m not quaffing Austin Hope or Clio and find both those wines undrinkable), but I’ll leave to a winemaker who knows the chemistry to explain how common that is.
Thanks, that’s a great point. I think the Cayuse Syrahs are typical to Syrah and show what seems to be interesting site character (each is distinctive from the others in ways that have some commonality from year to year). I haven’t had their Tempranillo, but your comment doesn’t surprise me at all. When I was in Washington a few years ago, I wondered why so many producers were making Tempranillos that didn’t taste (to me) like Tempranillo. Even the Cabernets that are harvested on the later side lose a lot of varietal character, including Cayuse’s (I know it’s a blend, but Cabernet dominant).
Not sure how Aubert (chards over 15% abv) and L’Aventure make that list, but I would agree with Carlisle, Bedrock, Rivers-Marie, and Rhys. They are still rich in fruit without being excessive, while also decidedly not seeking an old-world feel (like Brick House, Ceritas, and other low abv high acid focused producers). Bergstrom and Penner Ash from Oregon are probably two more that are on the larger side of Oregon, but not over the top, while Antica Terra is probably one step closer to really big (for Oregon).
Reading through this list, I’m fascinated that Aubert is mentioned so many times. Kutch or Mount Eden I’d get, but Aubert? Aubert is as massive and extracted as possible. 15% abv chards. They carry acid, at times, and have a less distinct oak profile than some, but those wines are humongous.
The OP’s marker he set down is Saxum, and in that context, Aubert is not a bad suggestion: it’s about as big as you can get without being unbalanced. But as noted throughout this thread, many people think big wines are intrinsically unbalanced.
This.
I mean, you can still seek out fruit sources that suit your desires. You can train vines to produce a higher skin to juice ratio. But, if you go trying to force grapes to be something they don’t want to be, you aren’t doing yourself any favors. That’s what the pretenders do: Pick out of late, adjust, manipulate, adjust more, etc. Basically shit winemaking. Gimmicks to make a wine give a big first impression. The industry already went through this cycle where we saw pretenders try to mimick successful big wines. We saw the highly rated wines that fell apart after a few years. We saw seas of flat-out terrible wines that weren’t even close to what they were trying to copy in the first place.
If you want to learn “balance”, that’s what you should be pursuing, not trying to force or make balance.
Larry,
It sounds like we are definitely on the same wavelength.
The term “typicity” is an important component to add as context to the conversation.
There are some bigger new world style wines that are pleasurable to drink in their own right. Rich, flavorful, opulent, ostentatious. I’ve been to several wineries that excel in this arena. Unfortunately, what sometimes occurs in that scenario is that you taste through a lineup of wines that become almost indistinguishable from each other. Varietal typicity and flavor/aroma distinctions of different blends somehow get dominated by the house style. While they are all delicious wines in their own right, they also seem to lose their own individual sense of distinction.
If someone were to ask me for a recommendation on a pleasurable wine, there would be no hesitation in recommending the Epoch Tempranillo. It was an enjoyable wine that was masterfully crafted. However, if someone were to ask me specifically for a Tempranillo recommendation, it wouldn’t necessarily be at the top of my list.
I’m guessing this is all fairly similar to a high quality steak. Some would argue that any sauce on a steak is sacrilegious. Others might perceive that a little bit of sauce can enhance the flavors and that the combination is greater than the individual entities. Others might just love the sauce itself and simply use the steak as a utensil for sauce delivery.
The question is, how far can you go with the sauce without losing a sense of flavor that’s derived from the steak?
There are bigger new world style wines that seem to make sacrifices in their distinction (varietal character, terrior, depth, complexity, nuances) to become as big, rich, and opulent as possible.
My target is to capture thoughts on model wines that push the envelope of big, rich, fruity, and opulent without trading off all sense of identity (typicity) in the pursuit of those things.
I don’t know if you would put this in the “New World Style” category but I would so here is a note of mine from 2012 on the FX Pichler 2002 Riesling “M”:
“For me the M was the big surprise of the night. I’d have guessed that it would have fallen apart by now but somehow the elephant is still proceeding gracefully across the high wire on a bicycle while trumpeting happily.”
I do not tend to drink many wines like that.
I tend to like wines in the 13% alcohol range.
I do not seek out wines by alcohol, it just has been my experience.
But probably the best example I can think of is Herman Story which I have enjoyed but sometimes crosses that line a bit.
I’ve had several, and they were all so far over my line that I wouldn’t be able to get through a whole glass. Different tastes and all of that…
OP says “I’m looking to acquire some model examples to help calibrate my palate.” To me, that doesn’t sound at all like what you guys are making it out to be. I think having some benchmarks for certain styles, especially if it’s a style one wants to make (which could obviously be achieved through buying fruit or vines well suited to that style), is not only good but important. I haven’t met any great winemakers who haven’t spent a lot of time tasting other people’s wines, whether that’s getting very intensive with wines from their own region, wines from all over the world, or both. Maybe you both just think that balance can’t be achieved with big, ripe wines. I know people who feel that way and I respect it, but it’s not true at all for my taste, even though I drink mostly wines under 14% ABV (other than a good bit of Nebbiolo above that).
You don’t seem to have grasped what we said, and, well, stated as much.
Also surprised to see how people are talking about Aubert in this thread. I had the chance to share two different bottles of Aubert at two different dinners. Both were overtly alcoholic, sickly sweet, and in general some of the least “balanced” white wines I have ever tried. Others at the dinner (civilians, not wine geeks) agreed. I don’t think I’ve ever experienced such a big divergence between reputation on the boards and what was in the bottle. Sorry, I know it’s a bit obnoxious when people blast a wine that others like, but just speaking to my own experience.
This comment from Otto captures my sense of things. The issue to me is not so much “balance”, which can be a very abstract concept, as whether a wine is interesting and appetizing or boring and one-note. A lot of “big” wines are impeccably balanced in the sense that nothing sticks out and nothing is overtly offensive, but the volume of fruit intensity and weight is such that the wine is only “saying” one thing. The first couple of sips are nice because hey, this wine is “delicious”, but then drinking it quickly becomes boring and then by the second glass oppressive, like a chore to get through as Otto says. When the goal is to have a wine that is really intriguing, shows a lot of different elements, changes in the glass, and that inspires curiosity about the next sip, “big fruit” and lots of alcohol and extraction can work against it. Not always, but a lot of the time.