And sorry Cris, I was spent a good time writing while watching the oscars and having some 07 Drouhin Charmes Chambertin, so did not see your response post until after I posted. However, I would again offer you fruit from my vineyard-- one winemaker will be taking some fruit based strictly on pH this year rather than sugar so I am happy to see someone walk the walk rather than talk the talk when it comes to Zinfandel.
I would chime in with Arnot Roberts, Cabot, Ryme, WInd Gap, Edmunds St. John, Arcadian, Lioco, Donkey and Goat, Clos Saron, and Salinas. All I believe, from what I have tasted, definitely show their sense of place.
I tend to favor the argument that riper wines mask terroir, and of course winemaking manipulations such as overuse of oak and stems clearly do as well (though they may not completely overpower terroir in some cases). But some of the Carlisle wines do seem to go counter to that thinking. There is zero doubt that Mike’s Zins (at least those that have been around enough years to learn their signatures) can exhibit wonderful terroir: Carlisle Vyd, Montafi (big time), sometimes Rossi. I don’t think I ever got a handle on Goldmine, but it’s going to be very interesting to compare the Carlisle versions of Pagani, Monte Rosso, Bedrock, and others Mike is now making to wines from Ridge, Ravenswood, etc. BTW, the 2010 Carlisle Bedrock Zin might be one of the best Zins I’ve ever tried, really looking forward to its release.
To me a certain kind of ripeness is characteristic of California. Weather is part of terroir. I think non-spoofed California wines still have a characteristically luxuriant texture and exuberant fruit. That goes for more restrained wines like Ridge and Togni and lots of old-style Napa too. You can really see it in the case of Carlisle where there is a Californian intensity and abundance of fruit but also site specificity and an ease of expression that does not feel ‘spoofed’. I love it when Mike plays the fruit intensity characteristic of California against very old-world, restrained grape varietals like Mondeuse and Mourvedre. Some of the Carlisle Mondeuse I’ve had are among the most distinctive, exciting, and pleasurable wine experiences around – the velvety texture and deep fruit somehow complement and highlight the live-wire, intense acidity and tannin of the grape.
The work that Mike & Morgan do with historic vineyards for me are the purest expression of California wine, but given that these field blends can contain vastly different varietal mixes, can we even know how transparent they are to their terroir? Or are we tasting a blend that happens to be tuned to the preference to whomever planted the field?
I’d define terroir to be the contribution the soil and climate make to the character of the wine, and I don’t think I can extend that definition to the varieties planted. However, if the blends were tuned to work specifically with a vineyard’s soil and climate, then maybe it’s not so clear where to draw the line.
If you want to look at what these guys do with Syrah, however, now you see site expression clearly showing through. Let me suggest that what Morgan does with Hudson, releasing a series of wines that show varying level of winemaker expression, might be the most instructive tasting to show how winemaking and terroir interact.
I’ll also throw out there that sitting down with Tyler Thomas at Donelan is a insightful tour of varying terroirs across Sonoma. Since they’ve pared down the lineup to just a few vineyards, it’s quite clear and easy to understand the sight expression in each one of these.
The question is “who” as opposed to “which varietals” best express terroir - but let me digress to “which.” When we consider site expression, I think most of us focus on cool climate varietals, primarily Pinot. In my view, a couple of warmer climate varietals, namely Zinfandel and Grenache, also express site very well. I find Carlisle’s historic Zin offerings very distinctive and endlessly fascinating. Will Bucklin makes an old vine Grenache from Old Hill Ranch that is totally unique. Low alcohol old vine offerings like Scherrer OMV and Nalle “Henderlong Ranch” are extremely precise in their flavor profile. A couple of old vine Zin blends from Ridge - Geyserville and Jimsomere maintain a distinctive character year after year. I’m somewhat new to Bedrock Vineyard, but am enjoying the experience of getting acquainted. It’s always fun for me to sample the Turley selections from various appellations - Ueberroth from Paso, Fredericks from Sonoma Coast, Duarte and Salvador from Contra Costa, Hayne from Napa, etc. to detect the regional character. I’d like to put together a tasting on a specific vineyard - say Pagani Ranch and compare the offerings from various producers … in this case Biale, Carlisle, Seghesio, Ridge and Bedrock, to find that underlying site expression.
My site expressive Pinot favorites tend to be from Anderson and the SCM (Copain, Rhys and Windy Oaks). I’d say Ted Lemon’s Littorai (which includes the aformentioned appellations along with Sonoma Coast) is also at the forefront of site expression. Syrah (along with producers already mentioned), I’m looking at Arnot-Roberts and Lagier-Meredith. Cabs, I’m exploring Arnot Roberts and Corison.
Just a few that spring to mind:
Peay
Cabot
Carlisle
Dunn
Scholium
Bedrock
Broc
Clos Saron
Windy Oaks
Arcadian
Mt Eden
Mayacamas
Renaissance
Forlorn Hope
Thackrey
Rhys
Mike,
Wondering on some of the sites that you mention what % of them are Zinfandel or Grenache? Does that effect the “which varietal” conclusions when some of the vineyards are mixtures of fairly decent %s of other grapes? Maybe it means that the site is so important that the grape type is unimportant as far as terroir expression goes.
Just wondering…
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
Swan
Tom,
I wonder if there are any winemakers anywhere who can meet your criteria. Grape varieties that show terroir more (e.g., Pinot Noir, Riesling, etc.) tend to also reveal winemaking a lot. My favorite Burgundy producer, Jacky Truchot makes wines that I believe truly show off the respective terroirs. Yet, the couple of times I have tasted them blind in a lineup of other Burgundies, they are more easy than most to pick out as Truchot wines.
Someday, I would love to do the following experiment. In Germany, there tend to be a number of vineyard sites with common ownership. For example, a number of producers like Loosen, Christoffel and Merkelbach own in both Erdener Trepchen and Urzier Wurzgarten, I believe. I would like to taste a range of these wines blind and see if it were easier to pick out producer or terroir.
Hi Adam, distinctive historic varietal compostion in some of these old vineyards certainly makes the terroir argument more complex as does the fact that many old vine wines (Scherrer OMV and Nalle Henderlong, for example) are only made by a single producer. I hate to admit this publically, but my belief in the ability of Grenache to express site comes more from the S. Rhone than California (the Old Hill example notwithstanding).
Siduri “Rosellas”, to me expresses site extremely well and is somehow consistently distinct from “Garys”, a proximate SLH vineyard. You can explain this better than I can, but it indicates to me that Siduri is a producer that expresses terroir well.
The SLH is a favorite wine region for me (the closest to my home) and sometimes I overlook it.
I am enjoying this very interesting thread. I wouldn’t say I “worship” terroir, but then again, I guess I do. I believe that a clear expression of site-derived character and nuance can lift an otherwise avarage wine up to excellent, or an excellent wine up to outstanding. And no wine that obscures its origin through winemaking signature can ever be a great wine IMO, although I sometimes make isolated exceptions such as Champagne.
I would like to quibble with Tom’s opening, and say that every Euro-centric wine geek I know would agree that California vineyards do have terroir, but often the wines do not express it due to winegrowing and winemaking decisions. (Indeed, every square meter of the Earth has terroir, though much of it is not suitable for wine grapes.) For decades, the media coverage of CA wine has focused on personalities and winemaking process, rather than individual sites, and this continues today although clearly a small counter-current is beginning to gain speed. And so the CA wine industry has also focused on personalities and process, and most of the consumers have as well.
Like Howard Cooper, I’d also disagree with Tom’s notion that the standard is an absence of producer style, but rather the presence of a producer style that does not obscure site expression. Rousseau’s Burgundies have a producer style that is distinct from Dujac’s, but both allow the site to speak clearly, and as the wines mature the producer style tends to step back and allow the terroir to shine through even more clearly.
There is another side to the concept of terroir that California’s industry doesn’t really want to think about… hand-in-hand with focus on site expression comes the conclusion that some terroirs are better than others, and the best terroirs are really quite rare. In Burgundy, the grand crus are 1%, the premier crus are 10%, and the other 89% are regional or communal wines. In Bordeaux, the classified growths are the tiny tip of the hierarchy. I doubt the ratios are that much different in California.
So the real goal, to a Euro-centric terroir-worshipper like me, has two parts… grow your grapes in high-quality and distinctive sites; and then make the wine in a style that allows the site’s voice to be heard clearly.
In CA pinot noir, Rhys and Anthill Farms are good examples because the differences between the various wines in each portfolio are due to site, all having similar winemaking process. We’ll see if the voice of the site becomes even more clear as the wines age, but early indications are, Yes they do.
Howard, a great post. I certainly agree that absence of producer signature is not the criteria, as that would be basically impossible. In CA, the task is to find the producers who do not wipe out site expression with excessive ripeness and other winemaking decisions. There are some, and I think the trend may be toward more, gradually.
That Mosel tasting would be great. I’m trying to do something similar for a tasting I host in late March involving Gevrey and Chambolle, or perhaps Vosne and Chambolle. I don’t have the wines from exact same crus from the different producers, but not sure that is a deal breaker.
Lew,
Couple of questions, if I might.
If the standard isthe prsennce of a producer style that doesn’t obscure site expression why is Champagne extempted from this standard? Is the process of making Champagne so manipulative that it necessarily obscures the place? I am not well versed enough to recognize them, but know that some more knowledgeable folks than I point to differences in site.
Second, wouldn’t you need to be able to recognize a California site’s terroir to say that the wines “often…do not express it” becuaseof winegrowing and winemaking decisions? Wouldn’t it be just as possible that in at least some of those cases the terroir is being expressed but, because it doesn’t align with personal preferences or European norms, that it is not recognnized as the terroir?
FInally, while I would agree that we often don’t want to consider that some terroirs are better than others here in CA…I think we are often not awarded the benefit of time to make those discovers. Up until phloxera there was much (much, much…I forget the %) more land planted in Burgundy than there is now. It took a plague and global economic crisises for that land not to continue to be planted to this day, with largely only the best and most financially rewarding land being replanted. Recognition of the better terroirs was something of an econimic decision as well. Given some time, California will undoubtedly make decisions as to which sites are better and which are not for certain varietals…but this will be done (hopefully) without legislation telling us what can be planted where.
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
Arguments could be made for lots of wines. Disagreements will be voiced for most all of them
Yep.
Not sure how you separate the winemaker from the terroir as each winemaker will do something different with the grapes from the same terroir. And then as mentioned, that terroir has to do with the varietal mix. I think that’s why Europeans limit the grape choices - unless you do that, you can’t tell which site something is from.
At any rate, I’d nominate James Berry Vineyard as a unique site and you have several winemakers doing Syrah there and I think Pax, Wells Guthrie, and Justin Smith all express it differently. Nor would I say that one “expresses” it more or better than the others, which is the whole problem - I think in all cases, wine making trumps everything else, no matter what we call the style.
Then you have Pagani Ranch, and the St. Francis and Ridge wines are different but also different from their other wines. Is that a function of their different winemaking entirely or the site, which obviously is planted with a mix not found elsewhere?
I might not be able to play in the deep sand, but play I will nonetheless.
For Cabernet I nominate Morisoli, Crane & ToKalon
For Syrah I nominate Hudson & Las Madres
I have liked Merlot from Las Amigas
For others I have no clue as to my depth of experiance pales to most here, but I do enjoy myself a Pinot & Chardonnay from time to time. I might go the strtch and say that Sauvignon Blancs seem to have the least amount of tie-in with the dirt they derive from…again, in my limited experience.
Cheers!
Wow. Hard to believe I got this far down the list of wineries with nobody mentioning Diamond Creek. I feel like DC is the godfather of Cali terroir - assuming terroir still means a sense of place. I would agree that Dunn HM is a close second. Mayacamas third. Laurel Glen fourth.
In re-reading Tom’s post, perhaps these wines don’t match the criteria…but only because for the most part they are estate. The wines excel at expressing the soil and climates from whence they come.
Thanks Lew. You make my points more clearly than I did.
And, I agree that there are distinctive terroir in California. What could be more distinctive than Martha’s Vinyeard. I have had wines from California producers where the wines do express their terroirs, for example, try a range of Ridge Zins or Diamond Creek Cabernet, as someone else stated. In the last few years, I have had several opportunities to taste California wines from the 70s and 80s from top producers like Ridge, Phelps, Montelena, Sterling, Mondavi and Diamond Creek and they have been really wonderful.
Heitz is a fun example. In Robert Benson’s book “Great Winemakers of California” from the 1970s Joe Heitz says this:
“You know, a grower would like to have all his grapes in the barn by Labor Day, and I think they should hang on the vines until Christmas, so we’re always squabbling. But this is normal, nothing wrong with that.” Joe describes his winemaking as: No multiple passes thru the vineyard, all reds pressed (no free run juice), 100ppm sulfur at the crusher, always added yeast, frequent (Joe’s word) acid additions, fining on all the wines, and filtration on them as well, aging in American white oak uprights, and then Limousin barrels.
Nothing like messing up terroir from winegrowing and winemaking decisions. 
Adam Lee
Siduri Wines
I strongly believe this is often the case.