Found Collection

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

Joanne

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

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

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.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/grcook/wine/

Greg,
   I care. I want my wines to age. And age well. I don't want to drink a
Cab. the first year of its' life. I do want to wait 6 to 8 years for it to
mature and keep enjoying it for years afterwards. What I want to _avoid_ is
making the '***, ready-to-drink' wines that are being cranked out by so
many commercial wineries. If avoiding the use of enzymes in red wine
manufacture is the correct procedure, then that is what I want to know.
Joanne

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

excellent point.
Joanne

[If I were making a wine for early consumption, I'd blend in some cheaper
low-acid grapes (in California, only 51% is required for varietal labeling),
press early, fine hard to remove tannins, and filter. I don't know about the
enzymes- I've never used them. I generally go with 100% cabernet, press late
and hard, don't fine, don't filter, and leave it in the barrel for a couple
of years. But none of my cabernets are very drinkable until they get to be 5
years old or so. This year's Lodi zinfandel will be an experiment; I pressed
earlier than usual, and I'll see if it comes around any quicker.]

Andrew Werby
http://unitedartworks.com

Hi Everyone,

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

Hi all:

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

Martin,
   great post. So what are the yeasts that minimize tannin extraction, and
which are the one that maximise?
Joanne

Hi Joanne:

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

Joanne
The oldest thing we have is 5 years, all made with enzymes; and it
held up well.  I think it's more tannin related than anything with
enzymes; I have a 4 year old Chancellor that is still black, it's
still just barely drinkable.  I left it on the skins for several weeks
and pressed hard, it really was DARK!  Time will tell how well it
turns out, I have lots of others to drink while I wait it out.
Regards
Joe

Hi Andrew,  These days, 75% is required for varietal labeling.  The law was
changed more than 20 years ago.
lum

I'm sure it will never concern you Lum, but just in case it comes up in a
Trivial Pursuit game, Labrusca can still be labeled as a varietal with only
51%.

clyde