Karl, thanks for the follow up and for the great info about ML and pH.
There is just little point, here. You want to know what the acid level is or ph level is…or Brix…at harvest? Or what is in the bottle that you just opened? You want to know what you are tasting…I think. That could be well off from what was harvested. And we are not even considering spinning out or adding in. Do you need to know if it was oak barrels or spirals? Tannins added? What is the point? And any method that is used by a winery for one harvest does not translate to the next harvest. So seeking out similar wines is probably a moot point.
When you go to a restaurant, do you demand that each ingredient be revealed as salted or not? Dried or not? Fried how? What kind of wood was used in grilling? What type of deep-fryer are they using? What is the heat of the oven? Copper pans or cast iron…and so it goes.
To me, it diminishes the intent, which is to enjoy what we are consuming. “Concealing technical information” is not part of the equation for me, as a consumer nor as a producer. I just can’t fathom the thinking here. I buy and consume a fair amount of wine, too. I decide if I like it or not based upon what I am drinking. I will buy it again, and decide if there might be a theme, a profile. For a restaurant…what was my take-way? Looking to go back? Interested in trying more and different dishes?
You’re trying to make comparisons between us and the general public and also about pedestrian things vs. wine which allows itself to rabbit-hilong. Similarly, I’ve gone on brewery tours with people asking about the thickness of the fermentation tanks. Why? Because they’re curious and excited about beer.
And I assume that if I were super interested in food, I might want to know some of the questions you sarcastically pose, like the method of cooking or, by god!, maybe even the ingredients.
You can’t fathom the thinking here? It’s simple. It’s enthusiastic interest.
I can’t fathom your attitude a) towards your (potential) customers or b) about this entire subject, in general. You’re indignant that people are curious about something they’re going to consume and that they’re excited about.
Kyle:
I’ve been around here a long time. Most people who are active here know I don’t understand nor use sarcasm.
Indignant? No. Direct? For sure.
As a reminder, I am a consumer of wine. Do I grow and produce and sell? Of course. Most people here know that. But that does not define me. I don’t post in the politics forum, either, because I don’t fit nicely into any one box or category. And I don’t wish to be categorized.
Again, I am just emphatically encouraging people to look in the glass, sense it, taste it, form your opinion of it. Ask what you want. But don’t push back because I hold a different opinion than you do of how one looks at wine.
I find the OP’s question interesting and inoffensive. I don’t believe he is offended by my questions, either.
And, since riper fruit, which tends to have lower acid levels, yields more alcohol, that sweetness from alcohol would seem to be kind of a multiplier effect.
Chilling whites also tends to accentuate their acidity, I find. Some wines that seem fresh when cold become flabby at room temperature.
I agree with your red fruits/acid - dark fruit/lower acid thesis. I don’t have Jamie Goode’s “I Taste Red” at hand, but as I recall, he summarizes research there showing that acid levels affect the perception of the type of fruit. In other words, it’s not just that the riper the fruit, the darker the fruit flavors. I guess you’d test this by adjusting the acid levels in a given wine and see if the fruit profile shifts. I found this quite intriguing.
Hell, then why care about the varietal, country, or appellation? Just sell me a unlabeled bottle. As long as it tastes good, apparently I shouldn’t care.
You are making unwarranted jumps to conclusions, Daniel. Read the words again.
Perhaps I erred in that the OP was referring to whites. But I believe the OPINIONS I expressed cover reds, as well.
High alcohol to me always comes across as sweetness and then shows up on the finish as an alcohol burn like a spirit.
High pH in whites comes across as a flatness. Loss of energy and vibrancy. The fruit is dull.
In reds it is a little different. Depending on the balance it can be very difficult to tell here other than a darker tone to the fruit and a richness. The tannins are the kicker. They make up the stucture here in many cases unlike the whites where the acid is right out front. That makes it a difficult call.
Just my experience and opinion.
I have always appreciated the details on the Ridge website, for example on 2015 Geyserville:
Winemaking
Harvest Dates: 18 August – 15 September
Grapes: Average brix 24.3˚
Fermentation: Full crush, 100% floating cap. Natural primary and natural secondary (malolactic) fermentations; daily pump-overs; pressed at 8 days.
Barrels: 100% air-dried american oak barrels (5% new, 14% one and 81% three and four years old.)
Aging: Fourteen months in barrel.Sustainably farmed, hand-harvested estate-grown grapes; destemmed and crushed; fermented on the native yeasts, followed by full malolactic on the naturally occurring bacteria; 0.12mg/L calcium carbonate added to 13 of 31 fermentors; oak from barrel aging; minimum effective sulfur for this wine (35 ppm at crush; 77 ppm over the course of aging); pad filtered at bottling. In keeping with our philosophy of minimal intervention, this is the sum of our actions.
While I certainly do not delve into the scientific details, for those of us that buy a wine like this in most years, it is interesting to follow. I noticed over the years that a particular cuveee of Ridge was becoming too oaky for me, and looking at the annual data on the barrels, I realized that the use of new oak had been trending up. So was able to discern it was Ridge, not my palate.
Now that said, many of the wines I do buy tell you very little. Ridge seems to be an anomaly I think.
If I find the food interesting? You bet I want to know many more things than what you were able to come up with.
Same with wine.
I am surprised by Merrill’s comments. I love tasting wines blind. It is fun trying to guess what the grape is, where it was made, etc. It is important to understand and differentiate the components when doing this. Personally, I wish all wines had more information on the label regarding additives, acid and residual sugar levels.
Uh… actually, I’ve been known to ask questions like that.
I was thinking about Karl’s data. A rise in pH of 0.3 is huge. Fascinating.
Merrill,
The original poster was not asking for specific numbers or asking about vintage variability - and only about white varieties.
And he did not imply something was ‘off’ out ‘out of balance’ - just trying to hear what others have to say about differentiating whites with higher pHs vs impressions of alcohol.
And you are correct - ‘numbers’ in of themselves are ‘worthless’ without context, and labs certainly have been known to provide incorrect information from time to time.
Getting back to the point that I made before, by having any white wine (or rose for that matter), that wine will be somewhat ‘naked’ - you will easily be able to ascertain how much oak influence the wine has, if there is any residual sugar, the perceived acidity in the wine, whether alcohol is in balance or not, and if there are obvious faults. By cooling a white wine (or rose), you accentuate the acidity, but decrease the volatiles, muting the aromatics of the wine. You also ‘change’ the texture of the wines, ‘smoothing it out’ a bit.
There is a correlation between pH and acidity, but it is not ‘direct’. You can have a chardonnay, for instance, with a pH of 3.4 and 6 grams of acid; you can also have one that has a pH of 3.6 and 6 grams of acid; and you can also have one that has a pH of 3.8 and 6 grams of acidity. Why? Well buffering capacity comes into play; soil comes into play; vintage comes into play. And will these three wines appear to have differing levels of acidity? Yes . . .
And different varieties will show themselves differently with higher pHs IMHO. I work with rhones, and I can tell you that a higher pH Grenache Blanc will not ‘appear’ to have as much ‘viscosity’ as a Roussanne or Marsanne that has the same pH. Why? Great question and I do not know for sure - but will guess that it has something to do with a higher level of ‘dissolved solids’ that exist in the latter two varieties and this is apparent right from the beginning of fermentation, when these take on a more amber hue than Grenache Blanc.
As others have said, higher levels of alcohol can also appear ‘sweet’ - this may be due to ‘ripeness’ or it may be due to fusel alcohols that are existent at higher alcohol levels.
As far as apparent acidity falling during ML fermentation, it certainly could, though the shifts are usually not that high. A pH shift of .3 is really dramatic - I normally see that shift be closer to .1 or .15 at most. This of course has to do with the amount of malic acid present after primary fermentation is completed, and this will vary based on vintage variations, climate and variety.
Keep the questions coming please - there’s plenty of us on here that appreciate them, and respect that inquisitiveness and curiosity is a great thing when it comes to learning about and trying to understand wine better.
Cheers.
As a wine maker I appreciate when other wine makers are willing to share technical details. pH is very interesting since it is usually inversely correlated with TA - and it is a quick and precise way to quantify acidity ( pH =-log[H+] ).
That said it isn’t clear to me whether TA or pH are what we percieve as “acidity” (sourness).
I have two pH meters. If I’m curious enough about a wine I can just measure it (though rarely do because of the time it takes to calibrate the meter 
)
An easier to use pH meter would be a great thing.
I have one at work and hate the bother.
I still have my doubts about how precise it is, too.
The evening I dined with you in NYC, you were WAY too engaged with our table and the wines to get into that level on the food. ![[wow.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/7/7d450e9830889c8943b674446a21b7254cad657e.gif "wow"){kind=small}
We had all we could do to eat, discuss our perceptions on the wines, and actually capture what we opened!
As I mentioned, the problem with only looking at pH is that titratable acidity should, but does not always, correlate.
In fact, it is become ‘more common’ due to the last few hot vintages that pH’s appeared somewhat ‘normal’ but acidities were much lower than one would expect. As a winemaker, if you are only looking at pH’s, you certainly could be ‘fooled’ by how ‘acidity’ the grapes, must, or wine actually has . . .
Too much information when it comes to wine is ‘irrelevant’ - but then again, too little can be dangerous.
Cheers.
No, you don’t. Producers have to provide the label information the law requires (which does not include pH), nothing else. You have no right to anything more.
You do, however, have the freedom to vote with your pocketbook against producers who do not provide the information you desire.