I hear a lot of people around these parts (Napa Valley, where I work) talk about “mountain” vs “valley” fruit, usually when trying to sell wine or impress their friends. I’m still pretty new to the area (moved here in 2019) and I have been trying to sort the wheat from the chaff when it comes to the real, discernible differences between grapes grown at elevation vs. on the valley floor, and where on the slope those distinctions blur. I’d love to tap into the collective tasting, growing, winemaking, and educational experiences of this community to learn a little bit about what, if any, your experience tells you is the difference (or are the differences) between fruit grown at elevation and in the valley.
This isn’t a trap, and I’m not trying to say there’s no difference. I understand that the higher diurnal range, thinner soils, different near-surface geology, higher average wind speeds, varying aspects, and steeper slopes will combine to yield fruit that produces discernibly different wines. What I’d like to know is, in your experience, how those differences manifest in the wines themselves and, if possible, why.
I certainly think there is a difference between mountain and valley vineyards… I’d hate to be general though. There are nuances with all areas, so being general with describing perceived differences can lead to a heated discussion real quick. I also find an even larger unique difference between fruit grown on a level piece of dirt, then on a hillside, with a preference towards hillside fruit, but some of the most costly wines from Napa are from fruit down on the valley floor, level grade.
But seeing how you live there now, maybe spend a day tasting wine in each area? Spring Mountain, Howell Mountain, Mount Veeder, Diamond… Then hit a few on the floor, Stags Leap/Oakville/Rutherford?
Ben - As you probably know if you’ve been there a few years, you also have to factor in where the vineyard is north and south. On the valley floor, in the summer, it’s a lot hotter in Calistoga than in Yountville or Oakville.
I think that’s somewhat true of the hillside vineyards, too. Mt. Veeder seems to produce fairly restrained wines with lower alcohols. I believe it gets some fog from the bay, and the hill is still fairly heavily wooded, which probably keeps it cooler than, say, Howell Mountain.
I don’t drink much from Napa these days and most of what I have in the cellar is older so not sure if things have changed.
I have always felt that there is a difference between the mountains to the east and those to the west. The wines from the west range are the ones that have always appealed most to me. The flavors seem to avoid getting over ripe and to retain better balance even at higher alcohol levels. I have had many wines from the eastern range that show more ripe and often what I would consider over ripe. I assumed it was the difference between morning sun and afternoon sun but don’t really know.
The floor is harder for me to characterize. So much so that long ago I decided to stick to only a few producers that I like. I was spending more than I wanted trying wines that just were not in my wheelhouse.
It is a great question and I believe there are differences but not sure what drives them.
These are very broad generalizations that only hold up from a 10,000 ft view. For me valley fruit tends to be redder, warmer, more fruit driven. Mountain fruit tends to be darker, cooler, with more secondary types of notes as a standard inclusion. And of course these all depend on what part of the valley and what mountain. Over the course of time these are the big trends to me. Not rules.