Terroir vs. Varietal Typicity???

[Rick_Gregory]

@Adam Lee

Rick,

On the last points, there are some sites that are exceptionally good…but not quite at the La Tache level…even those sites might not get there with better farming/winemaking? I am not thinking of taking a poor quality place and moving it up to top level…but someplace close and moving it up. I can think of examples of that happening, where a site has improved dramatically with new ownership, etc.

Or are there sites like La Tache which are seemingly untouchable/unreachable?

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Sure. If you think of a site having a given terroir potential then farming and winemaking both can reveal or diminish that signature as can planting different varieties there. Great wines are, to me, a blend of a site with great potential and a unique signature, the right variety to express that terroir combined with farming and winemaking that maximizes the expression of the terroir via the grape. Vintage conditions obviously factor in here too of course.

Put another way, the variety is the lens through which the site is expressed. Vintage condition are a limiter. Farming and winemaking can clean and focus what’s seen through the lens or they can obscure and distort it.

[Adam_Lee]

I’ve often wondered about a place like Chateau Grillet…having never tasted it when it was considered to be in its prime. Is the site/terroir that great but something has changed about the planting? About the farming and winemaking? Or was the site never that great but experience with Viognier so limited that something good seemed great.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[Howard_Cooper]

@Adam Lee

@Howard Cooper

@Adam Lee

Rick,

On the last points, there are some sites that are exceptionally good…but not quite at the La Tache level…even those sites might not get there with better farming/winemaking? I am not thinking of taking a poor quality place and moving it up to top level…but someplace close and moving it up. I can think of examples of that happening, where a site has improved dramatically with new ownership, etc.

Or are there sites like La Tache which are seemingly untouchable/unreachable?

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

What does any of this have to do with the question posed?

Howard,

Sorry, maybe I’ve gone astray. Kevin asked if La Tache was about Pinot Noir. I assume his answer is “no.” But, for other vineyards, it is about Pinot Noir more than site. So the question I was wonderinng is could those vineyards reach the level of La Tache (or at least become less than just about the grape) if the farming and/or winemaking were better.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Certainly a totally different topic, but I think that winemakers from most of the great regions of the world have proved over and over again that it is possible to make poor wine from great terroir. Dosn’t seem like that interesting or unique a point.

[craig_v]

Mainly I don’t want the fruit or the terroir overly masked by oak. I recently tasted an 08 Nuit St George Chaignot 1er Cru from Chevillon side by side with another '01 NSG 1er Cru from Vougeraie that at 7yrs older was still laboring hard to shine though its oak treatment. The Chevillon was much fresher and way more tranparent.

[John_D_Zuccarino]

Varietal character and that sense of place must be in balance … to have more of one over the other is a flaw or just manipulation bastardized to the point of over expression… All wines should have an accent of that sense of pace … It’s what makes distinguished wines great…

[Howard_Cooper]

@John D. Zuccarino

Varietal character and that sense of place must be in balance … to have more of one over the other is a flaw or just manipulation bastardized to the point of over expression… All wines should have an accent of that sense of pace … It’s what makes distinguished wines great…

John, what do you do with a wine like the one I described before. A Cotat Sancere Rose. Tasted like Sancere made from Sauvignon Blanc, but maybe a bit more full-bodied. Really wonderful to drink. But, I saw little in the way of varietal character (or maybe I had just never seen Pinot expressed in that way). Probably the best rose I have ever had.

I guess to me the bottom line is whether the wine has something interesting and unique to say. A lot of the time, for me, this has to do with terroir, but not always.

[larry_schaffer]

Don’t want to dip my foot in too much, but I think Craig makes a great point here. My guess is that there have probably been a number of fantastic examples of terroir-driven varietal typicicity (how’s THAT for a mouthfeel, Mr Hill?!?!?) that have been ‘ruined’ by over-oaking the wines. Happens way too often IMHO.

To answer the original question, what I admire truly is a combination of the two - with varietal typicity driven by a sense of ‘place and time’ . . . This is one of the reasons I am not enamored with certain ‘bigger and bolder’ wines that may, on their own, be very interesting wines, but that, to me, lack much varietal character . . .

Cheers

[Andrew_Kaufman]

According to Philippe Drouhin - at a tasting held here in Los Angeles several years ago, it is terroir since you cannot grow truly good Pinots anywhere in California (though some can be grown in Oregon).

[craig_v]

It’s my impression for Pinot Noir that in it’s true natural, hands off - light winemaker touch its a paler semi translucent crimson red wine, which I dig. Or, do some terroirs (absent heavy oak treatment and extractive techniques) still naturally yield darker almost opaque colored Pinot Noir anyway? Anyone know for fact if there is actually one true color of Pinot Noir if left to its own accord without manipulation? Or is it variable too because of terroir?

[Kevin_Harvey]

@craig vanderah

It’s my impression for Pinot Noir that in it’s true natural, hands off - light winemaker touch its a paler semi translucent crimson red wine, which I dig. Or, do some terroirs (absent heavy oak treatment and extractive techniques) still naturally yield darker almost opaque colored Pinot Noir anyway? Anyone know for fact if there is actually one true color of Pinot Noir if left to its own accord without manipulation? Or is it variable too because of terroir?

Craig,
I think that is a generally held misconception. The Burgundian vineyard heirarchy becomes darker and more intense as you move from the bottom (Bourgogne) to Village to Premier Cru to Grand Cru. Vintage matters too and the palest years generally had more rain and/or higher yields.

[craig_v]

Thanks Kevin, but wouldn’t the new oak treatment and extractive techniques also come into play as the wine gets more expensive leading to darker wines unless the the winemaker takes a more hands off approach? For example, the purest in Brunello Di Montalcino like Biondi Santi complain about all of the artificially dark Brunello resulting from bariques. I also think of the scene from the movie Mondovino in a small Italian wine shop where the store owner complains that all of the expensive BDX blend reds from the Tuscan coast are unnaturally dark and all taste about the same…in his opinion.

@Kevin Harvey

@craig vanderah

It’s my impression for Pinot Noir that in it’s true natural, hands off - light winemaker touch its a paler semi translucent crimson red wine, which I dig. Or, do some terroirs (absent heavy oak treatment and extractive techniques) still naturally yield darker almost opaque colored Pinot Noir anyway? Anyone know for fact if there is actually one true color of Pinot Noir if left to its own accord without manipulation? Or is it variable too because of terroir?

Craig,
I think that is a generally held misconception. The Burgundian vineyard heirarchy becomes darker and more intense as you move from the bottom (Bourgogne) to Village to Premier Cru to Grand Cru. Vintage matters too and the palest years generally had more rain and/or higher yields.

[Dan_Rinke]

Back to Jura, is the lack to varietal typicity due to “vineyard terroir” dominating the wine or is it the “winery terroir” (resident microbes, to be specific flor yeast)?

[John_D_Zuccarino]

@Howard Cooper

@John D. Zuccarino

Varietal character and that sense of place must be in balance … to have more of one over the other is a flaw or just manipulation bastardized to the point of over expression… All wines should have an accent of that sense of pace … It’s what makes distinguished wines great…

John, what do you do with a wine like the one I described before. A Cotat Sancere Rose. Tasted like Sancere made from Sauvignon Blanc, but maybe a bit more full-bodied. Really wonderful to drink. But, I saw little in the way of varietal character (or maybe I had just never seen Pinot expressed in that way). Probably

the best rose I have ever had.

I guess to me the bottom line is whether the wine has something interesting and unique to say. A lot of the time, for me, this has to do with terroir, but not always.

Howard,

I think if you really liked the wine that answers a good question…is the wine great?..if it is kick back and enjoy it… one does not have to look to balance to be satisfied … just look at the over oaked fruit bombs with high scores … far from balanced, yet I confess some are wonderful …Cheers! !!

[Kevin_Harvey]

@craig vanderah

Thanks Kevin, but wouldn’t the new oak treatment and extractive techniques also come into play as the wine gets more expensive leading to darker wines unless the the winemaker takes a more hands off approach? For example, the purest in Brunello Di Montalcino like Biondi Santi complain about all of the artificially dark Brunello resulting from bariques. I also think of the scene from the movie Mondovino in a small Italian wine shop where the store owner complains that all of the expensive BDX blend reds from the Tuscan coast are unnaturally dark and all taste about the same…in his opinion.

Craig,
Extractive techniques can make a wine darker as well. Historically, natural intensity and concentration have been highly prized (such as '05 Burgundy or the Grand Crus) but winemaking techniques which try to mimic this usually have drawbacks. The Italian situation was compounded by the addition of darker varieties (like Cab or Syrah) to a traditionally lighter wines like Sangiovese.

[Brian_Loring]

@Andrew Kaufman

According to Philippe Drouhin - at a tasting held here in Los Angeles several years ago, it is terroir since you cannot grow truly good Pinots anywhere in California (though some can be grown in Oregon).

I don’t see that as argument for terroir, but rather an argument for typicity.

[Kevin_Harvey]

@Andrew Kaufman

According to Philippe Drouhin - at a tasting held here in Los Angeles several years ago, it is terroir since you cannot grow truly good Pinots anywhere in California (though some can be grown in Oregon).

Only if terroir is defined so as to exist exclusively where Philippe owns land!
Seriously though, Veronique Drouhin has seen many CA Pinots that she likes.
Generalizing on an area as vast as CA is pretty misleading. FWIW, CA has much greater diversity of soil (compared to either Oregon Pinot country or Burgundy) and climates that mimic both or even run cooler.

[Andrew_Kaufman]

@Brian Loring

@Andrew Kaufman

According to Philippe Drouhin - at a tasting held here in Los Angeles several years ago, it is terroir since you cannot grow truly good Pinots anywhere in California (though some can be grown in Oregon).

I don’t see that as argument for terroir, but rather an argument for typicity.

Brian my comment was somewhat TIC. I wouldn’t say typicity as much as arrogance, But that is just me.

[Ray_Walker]

@Kevin Harvey

@craig vanderah

It’s my impression for Pinot Noir that in it’s true natural, hands off - light winemaker touch its a paler semi translucent crimson red wine, which I dig. Or, do some terroirs (absent heavy oak treatment and extractive techniques) still naturally yield darker almost opaque colored Pinot Noir anyway? Anyone know for fact if there is actually one true color of Pinot Noir if left to its own accord without manipulation? Or is it variable too because of terroir?

Craig,
I think that is a generally held misconception. The Burgundian vineyard heirarchy becomes darker and more intense as you move from the bottom (Bourgogne) to Village to Premier Cru to Grand Cru. Vintage matters too and the palest years generally had more rain and/or higher yields.

Hello Kevin
I actually haven’t seen this to be as cut and dry as your comment makes it seem. A lot depends on the vintage, of course. In line with this is how each vineyard, each section responds to a vintage. I’ve situations in each vintage where some premier crus are darker than the Grand Cru of the same vintage. This is with keeping all of my inputs unique year over year. Keep in mind that the classification is not some neat and tidy system. It relied on an amazing combination of factors, including price, market perception, historical considerations, politics as well as those actually attached to the vineyard and its terroir.

I disagree that darkness has anything to do with perceived quality.

As I have mentioned previously, Burgundy is about nuances both large and small as well as individuality. This is not the place to apply rigid rules. It simply has never worked here as it does elsewhere. As you move up the classification ladder, you may generally find an increasingly unique experience.

Bourgogne should taste of the region. Though certain terroir and lack of blending can provide an experience that is more representative of wines found in the surrounding lands classified as village. Generally, across much more vineyard land, you will find really strong similarities to each other.

Village will generally provide an experience that is more so related to the subject village. In this tier, you will find more distinction between neighbor lieux dits. And finding village wines with an actual lieu dit mentioned will potentially provide a more defined experience though it will still trend strongly toward the general focus of the village.

Those classed as Premier Cru vineyards will generally have a significant jump in diversity of expression. In theory, a Premier Cru and its neighbor will have strong terroir differences between them with a slant toward the general village qualities.

Grand Cru sites are not the grandest in the sense that they are the largest in stature. They are the peaks of mountains only in the sense that they are so separate from each other, completely unique from the next. These are the vineyards that should have the highest probability of providing the most singular of experiences.


An interesting way to think of the wines of Burgundy is to imagine each as a sphere-like shape. Each one has different textures, colors, and other subtleties that the other may not. There is no right or wrong color, shape or texture, nor one that that is best or worst. Over time, the most celebrated wines have been those that have been known to have a voice that is consistently unique, not the one that is the loudest or deepest.

Cheers

Ray

[Kevin_Harvey]

Hey Ray,
I didn’t mean to imply that concentration and intensity were the sole criteria used when ranking the vineyards, just that this was a key attribute both in the market and hierarchy.
The same goes for plant material in Burgundy today. Producers see lower-yielding, smaller berried clones (and the resulting concentration and intensity) as being of higher quality. Lighter, higher yielding selections (like Pinot Droit) are generally thought of as “lesser quality”. Again I don’t mean to imply that this is a sole criteria of “quality” just a very important one.

[Ray_Walker]

Hey Kevin
Not to be difficult. I can agree with the second part. But, which market are you speaking about? Today’s or the market at the point of the the first wide classification? We can say either A Jullien’s 1801 or J Lavalle 1855 for example.

Do you believe darkness to be a sound criteria of quality in red Burgundy or pinot noir generally speaking?

Also, in speaking more of how darkness, opacity, color (etc) relates to quality in red Burgundy, it is difficult to know since the trend is to supply more new oak and extraction methods (speaking to the notion of more material to extract from in the higher classed crus) as you climb the hierarchy ladder.