I think you are correct. There is a statistic (somewhere out there - might be
wrong, but it sounds correct) that around 60% of wine bought in Australia is
consumed within 24 hours. I suspect that the stats are similar elsewhere.
It appears to be a market driven phenomenon. Many more people drink wine now
(at least here) than they ever did and it has become less of a special drink.
In response to the drink-now pace of life, many wineries are making
fast-maturing wines (how many times have you read "drink now" as a description
of cellaring potential ?) because they don't want to maintain large stocks of
longer maturing wines, and don't want to have customers avoid their product
because they can't drink it immediately. It makes good economic sense to
produce a wine that will be consumed within 18 months of harvest, rather than
have a 3 to 5 year lead time. That's why there's so much cheap wine being made.
Thankfully, there are still some lines out there that actually recommend
cellaring for 3, 5 or 10 years. (Sadly) these are usually at the premium end of
the market and there's still a small proportion of the market that understands
the value of buying a few cases for laying down, even if they buy drink-now
wines for day to day consumption.
Chris
If enzymes truncate the aging potential of red wines, can you imagine what
they'd do to _whites_? You might have to drink them while they're still
fermenting lest they go over the hill on you!
I can assure you that I've made white wines, using pectic enzyme, that held
up well for a full ten years. For that matter, they might _still_ be good
now, but they're long gone. :-(
These reds you're referring to were probably vinted in a style that simply
is not appropriate for long term aging. I'd guess that the grapes had
fairly high pH and were pressed either at dryness or a little earlier, and
not very hard. Also, the free sulfite was likely on the low side, and the
wine may have been fined pretty aggressively to polish off the rough edges.
The wine probably never saw much, if any, oak.
All that makes for a red wine that is very user-friendly when young, but
you'd better drink it early.
Tom S
----Greg
http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/grcook/wine/
> > Hello,
> > I have noticed that those commercial red wines (esp. Cab. Sauv.) that
are
> > from the previous year's vintage, and are smooth and ready to drink do
not
> > age very well. It would appear that these wines are to wine, what fast
food
> > is to cuisine. I have also noticed that those home winemakers that use
> > enzymes in their red wines (and make a very professional product), their
> > wines don't age well, either.
> > Is their a correllation? Or am I presuming something that isn't there?
> > Joanne
> No, I would say they are better than fast food. If a wine is full-bodies,
> smooth and delicious, who cares if it was last year's vintage or last
> decades vintage? Now a big mac on the other hand . . .
> ----Greg
> http://www.FoundCollection.com/
>These reds you're referring to were probably vinted in a style that simply
>is not appropriate for long term aging.
Salud,
Martin J. Crane
> >These reds you're referring to were probably vinted in a style that
simply
> >is not appropriate for long term aging.
> This raises a question: How much of this is driven by the fruit and how
much
> is controllable by vinification technique? IOW, can one divide the same
batch
> of grapes and vinify some of it so that it ages and the rest for quick
> consumption? It seems like some grapes would make a wine that has to be
aged,
> whereas other grapes are destined to make an early drinking wine, and some
fall
> in the middle. What would you look for in the grapes in order to make the
> determination re vinification techniques? Could you give a little more
detail
> on the differences in vinification to acheive a wine intended for aging
vs. a
> wine for drinking young?
> Salud,
> Martin J. Crane
Andrew Werby
http://unitedartworks.com
> > Hello,
> > I have noticed that those commercial red wines (esp. Cab. Sauv.) that
> are
> > from the previous year's vintage, and are smooth and ready to drink do
not
> > age very well. It would appear that these wines are to wine, what fast
> food
> > is to cuisine. I have also noticed that those home winemakers that use
> > enzymes in their red wines (and make a very professional product), their
> > wines don't age well, either.
> > Is their a correllation? Or am I presuming something that isn't
there?
> Isn't that an incorrectly punctuated compound question? :^D
> If enzymes truncate the aging potential of red wines, can you imagine what
> they'd do to _whites_? You might have to drink them while they're still
> fermenting lest they go over the hill on you!
> I can assure you that I've made white wines, using pectic enzyme, that
held
> up well for a full ten years. For that matter, they might _still_ be good
> now, but they're long gone. :-(
> These reds you're referring to were probably vinted in a style that simply
> is not appropriate for long term aging. I'd guess that the grapes had
> fairly high pH and were pressed either at dryness or a little earlier, and
> not very hard. Also, the free sulfite was likely on the low side, and the
> wine may have been fined pretty aggressively to polish off the rough
edges.
> The wine probably never saw much, if any, oak.
> All that makes for a red wine that is very user-friendly when young, but
> you'd better drink it early.
> Tom S
My sense of things is that extraction enzymes should either not affect long
term aging potential or slightly improve it. I think that there are other
reasons for those wines to be less age worthy. The enzymes allow for better
extraction of some phenolic compounds of which tannin is one. These
compounds help in long term aging by acting as anti-oxidants (among other
reasons.) The long term aging potential depends mainly on three things (and
also to a lesser extent on a variety of other things):
1. The amount of tannins and other phenolics present.
2. The PH
3. The amount of molecular sulfite present.
We can control all three, but when the grapes are high quality and we don't
have to adjust things very much, we can vinify so that there is a lot of
phenolic extraction and make an age-worthy wine. (Macerate with lots of
punch downs or pump-overs, extended skin contact, cold soak, etc.) Wines
meant for drinking sooner are either pressed earlier and more gently so that
the tannins are not harsh to begin with, or put through long extended
macerations to soften the tannins a la Mondavi. The latter will age better
than the former in my experience.
Regards,
John
I'm posting an informative reply I received from Layne M. vie e-mail to my
earlier question:
Based on what I know. . . .
Early to market wines are made . . . . .
from grapes from younger vines with higher yields
fermented at cooler temperatures (in the 60sF)
may be made with partial whole berry fermentation (carbonic maceration)
pressed sweet (at 3-5 B or higher)
pressed lightly
may not undergo MLF
with little or no barrel age (maybe flavored with beans or staves while in
SS tanks)
with yeasts that minimize tannin extraction.
All the above minimizes tannins while emphasizing fruitiness.
My pro winemaker friend Stillman Brown (www.jorywinery.com) tells me that
fermentation temp and when you press (sweet or dry) makes the biggest
difference.
Ageworthy wines are made at higher fermentation temps (85-90F), pressed at
dryness or later, aged in relatively new wood and use grapes from great
vineyards.
Layne M.
Folsom, CA
Salud,
Martin J. Crane
> I'm posting an informative reply I received from Layne M. vie e-mail to my
> earlier question:
> Based on what I know. . . .
> Early to market wines are made . . . . .
> from grapes from younger vines with higher yields
> fermented at cooler temperatures (in the 60sF)
> may be made with partial whole berry fermentation (carbonic maceration)
> pressed sweet (at 3-5 B or higher)
> pressed lightly
> may not undergo MLF
> with little or no barrel age (maybe flavored with beans or staves while in
> SS tanks)
> with yeasts that minimize tannin extraction.
> All the above minimizes tannins while emphasizing fruitiness.
> My pro winemaker friend Stillman Brown (www.jorywinery.com) tells me that
> fermentation temp and when you press (sweet or dry) makes the biggest
> difference.
> Ageworthy wines are made at higher fermentation temps (85-90F), pressed at
> dryness or later, aged in relatively new wood and use grapes from great
> vineyards.
> Layne M.
> Folsom, CA
> Salud,
> Martin J. Crane
I've asked Layne, and will post a response on Monday when I get back to my
computer at work. I gave my home computer last rites the other night.
Salud,
Martin J. Crane
> > Andrew Werby
> Hi Andrew, These days, 75% is required for varietal labeling. The law
was
> changed more than 20 years ago.
> lum
clyde
1. Fast Fermentation? Is this a problem?
2. for wine and food afficionados
4. FOOD-FUN-WINE August update
5. Red color in red wine kits?
7. Red Red Wine
8. Can one save/age champagne, or does it lose something with age?
9. Pinot Noir - Oak Aging and Aging in Carboy
10. Aging in carboy vs aging in bottle
11. Aging In Bulk Vs Aging In Bottle
12. bulk aging vs. bottle aging
13. SO2 & ageing reds (for tannic suppleness)
14. Pectin enzyme or no pectin enzyme, that is the question