Ray,
In one of my posts above I tried (not very cogently) to describe the difference between natural concentration and intensity and winemaking techniques that produce darker wines. Vineyard derived concentration and intensity have always been prized while winemaking techniques that attempt to emulate this are much more controversial (though even Henri Jayer’s cold soaks are fairly common now).
Speaking of personal preference, I do not value “darkness” though I do very much appreciate intensity and natural concentration. I think there is a bit of developing internet Burgundy mythology around “lighter is better” when this really has not been the case historically. For example 2005 Grand Crus from highly regarded producers would be called “fruit bombs” in their youth if they were from any other region. Of course cellaring them solves the “fruit bomb” problem…
The better the wine, the less I worry about varietal typicity.
Which makes perfect sense unless one only drinks monovarietal wine.
“Typicity” always seems like another word to describe confirmation of pre-existing opinions, as in “PN is supposed to taste like this, Sauv Blanc is supposed to taste like that”, etc. How do you find typicity when you have three or four varieties in the blend?
And typicity seems like the antithesis of terroir - is Merlot from some vineyard in Croatia supposed to taste the same as Merlot from Bordeaux?
The variety is the vector that terroir uses to shine.
Kevin
Happy New Year!
I saw the post. But I do want to know what texts you’ve seen that express your statement above. Since you’ve mentioned Henri Jayer, I’m curious how far back you are looking or speaking about.
I’ve texts back to the late 1700s, and I’ve not seen this specifically. I have seen mention of colour, but this is not darkness. In fact, in André Jullien’s Topographie de tous les vignobles connus, he speaks of wines that are ‘ordinary’ having just as much darkness as those at the ‘fine’ quality only less sap, less spirit. Again, we may be agreeing with each other if we are not speaking of colour being a defining measure of quality. Concentration of flavor, intensity, ‘sap’. With this I’ve seen historical (back to the 18th C.) reference.
Cheers
Ray
Ray,
I think of intensity as very different from size and color. I have had some light-bodied, light-colored (even muddy looking) wines from producers like Truchot that have an intensity of both bouquet and of flavor interest. If Kevin means by concentration and intensity something like weight, then I disagree. I really don’t think much of notes disliking a Grand Cru Burgundy because it “does not have the weight of a Grand Cru”. Many of my favorite wines have a lot of intensity but less weight. If Kevin is describing intensity in the same way I think of it, then I agree.
This is a great discussion. Thanks to everyone that has chipped in.
Hi Oliver. A question:
When you refer to “better wine” do you mean wine that already has a reputation for quality, from a well defined, established region, higher priced, or wine that tastes good after you have opened?
It seem to me that a lot of interesting wine from less famous areas might not get tasted with an open mind if “better” is defined in the former manner. Some of those areas might well have interesting terroir driven flavor profiles that might take some time to consider.
Hey Howard
You are preaching to the choir. I personally view intensity as something different as well.
I was referring to the quotes speaking to darker wines being connected to higher classification levels. They are not, in my personal opinion, the same as deepness in color is not a reliable factor in knowing the quality of a wine or indeed what the intensity, complexity and perceived impact will be.
This has been observed for quite some time, but speaking to this exact subject is the book I’ve mentioned from 1822, nearly 200 years ago
Ray,
I think you know my tastes in wine well enough to know that I am in 100% agreement that deepness in color is not a reliable factor in knowing the quality of a wine or indeed what the intensity, complexity and perceived impact will be. There seemed to be a thought of such equivalency 10-15 years ago, but over the past several years it seems (to me at least) that this has become discredited. This has been outstanding progress.
Interesting discussion about ‘intensity of color’ . . . I remember not too long ago that that was the basis of many claiming that pinots from the likes of the Santa Rita Hills were blended with syrah to achieve that color and body intensity, and were therefore ‘discredited’ by some.
Color intensity does not appear to be related to ‘quality’ to me - I’ve had some terrific older syrahs, pinots, and CdPs, among others, that were quite lightly colored relative to others but were actually quite wonderful wines.
As far as ‘techniques’ to gain greater color in wines, I do think that there is a lot of misconceptions here. For instance, I do not believe that cold soaking always leads to greater intensity. It does kill off some nasty ‘bugs’ that come in with the fruit and that winemakers do not want taking part in their fermentations. Other techniques, such as adding enzymes, do not always achieve what they ‘advertise’ to do either.
Just my $.02 . . .
Just to be clear I am not speaking about intensity of color. Nowhere near actually.
In speaking if intensity I was speaking about what I personally find in wines with what is call energy/life. This is not something measurable which is why it is such a personal thing.
Color? I couldn’t care less if it was dark or light or even close to a rosé. I just want great wine. Who judges? Myself. No apologies.
I’ve had dark wines that looked like deep Syrah that didn’t have much impact if flavor, seemingly devoid of intensity. I’ve also had pale wines that neared rosé that were packed with flavor and life. I’ve had all things in the middle and the opposite. I know better than make assumptions…at least in this context. 
Ray,
I was not referencing you or anyone else in particular . . . and I could not agree more with your points. I think ‘intensity’ is one of those things that really cannot be pinned down in objective terms - you know it when you experience it.
Cheers.
The great majority of the wine I deal with professionally is monovarietal; Fiano, Taurasi, Barolo, Sauvignon from the Alto Adige, true Prosecco…but I grew up on claret. When I drink an excellent example of, say, Pauillac or Barbaresco I am not looking for varietal notes, myself.
I think terroir notes, however hard they are to define, are more important than varietal character. Varietal character is very important for normal commercial examples, though, as the style is often defined by the variety (whether or not it’s on the label, eg inexpensive Côtes de Rhône).
Andrew,
I am using ‘better’ to mean ‘more to my taste.’ I think that enormous pleasure can be obtained from great examples of eg Minervois or Dolcetto di Dogliani. There’s no challenge in finding great wines from Clos de la Roche or Cannubi (other than paying for them).
Ray, a comment about your wines. When I tasted your 2009s and 2010s, I was surprised that they have a fairly dark color - I mean it did not look like Syrah or anything but it had a richer color than I expected. It surprised me a bit because from what I understand of the way you make the wines you are not doing anything to get a darker color. (1) Do you agree or disagree with my assessment (maybe I just drink too much Truchots), (2) If you agree, do you think it was the vintages or something else and (3) if something else, what? Obviously, as always, feel free to tell me I have lost my mind.
I think Dan’s on the right track here. The wines that triggered the post may be expressing more winemaking, or winery, terroir than dirt terroir. There are some pretty wild and fascinating wines from the Jura, but a fair amount of the unique character may have to do with winemaking techniques, yeasts used, etc, rather than “terroir”.
John, have you been to the Jura? The wines smell of the land, more so than any other region I have been to. Whether the terroir is due to local yeasts, the dirt or other… I don’t know, I expect a bit of everything is involved? I am pleased the wines are as unique as the wonderful Comte cheese… Cheers Mike
Hey Howard
you aren’t losing your mind. The 09s and 2010s are indeed generally darker in color. These are large in part due to vintage but also because of a few other variables. One part of this is my berry selection process. For our sorting tables we use flat white pieces of laminated wood laid on top of barrels turned on their heads. We touch and turn every cluster. Besides tossing out clusters that have mold, mildew, rot, second crop, etc, we also toss out berries that are larger than we’d like. I believe that this does contribute to the amount of color that some of the wines show. Along with this, I don’t control temperatures for my tanks. Each wooden tank is equipped with only the ability to see the temperature near the tank wall. There are endless way to control temp, but I prefer to let things run or rest (in either direction). There are a few other variables which I believe contributes to this, but I’d prefer to speak to these in a different thread as my philosophies and practices on this subject are not the focus of the thread, I’d prefer to not thread drift too much.
![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Cheers
Ray
Not to contribute to thread-drift, but…
The winemakers here probably know this, but for everyone else: There is a lot of research which suggests that pH is a major function of wine color and has a dramatic effect on different Anthocyanin pigments in wine. The lower the pH (the closer it is to 2,9) the more red-toned the wine, the higher the pH (closer to 4,0), the more purple. Of course, cold-soaking can also play a big role in wine pH. Besides color and tannin, potassium is released from the skins, which promotes Potassium bitartrate precipitation, lowering the total acidity and raising the pH of a wine. Lower pH wines also benefit from greater protection to bacterial spoilage from Sulfuring. It is entirely possible that a greater degree of ‘sulfur bleaching’ could result from the same dose of total SO2 added to a lower pH wine, than to a wine of higher pH. Of course, I have no idea if this is the case here or not, but it can definitely contribute to color-changes in different vintages where virtually the same cellar-tech is used.
Cheers,
Bill
Nope. haven’t been to the Jura. and perhaps you are right. But the Jura wines that smell of fino sherry and curry I think are reflecting the yeasts/winemaking used and not as much the land. I think rick gregory is right–to limit the discussion to terroir vs variety leaves out the two other sometimes equally important factors of winemaking and grape growing.