Pinot Gris vs Pinot Grigio - A one sided affair

Firstly, lets clear up a common misconception. Pinot Gris and Pinot Grigio are one and the same. Both come from the Pinot Gris grape variety, with the difference between the pair relating more to where it was traditionally grown - and the associated stylistic differences - than anything else.

Pinot Gris itself is actually a highly variable mutation of Pinot Noir, with 'Pinot' referring to the pine cone shaped bunches that characterise the 'Pinot' group of varieties. The grapes themselves range from a greyish blue to a brownish pink - often on the same bunch! The varietal name follows this closely; Pinot Gris is French, Pinot Grigio is Italian for 'Grey Pinot' '; Pinot Noir - French for 'Red Pinot' & the little seen, pale, highly aromatic Pinot Blanc - French for 'White Pinot'.

The challenge then is to establish the characteristics of Pinot Gris and Pinot Grigio under this cloud of variability. To do this, we look at both styles in their traditional homelands.
Firstly, Pinot Gris: The traditional home of Pinot Gris is Alsace, located on the border between France & Germany, in an area that has regularly changed hands between France & Germany for generations. In Alsace, Pinot Gris (which is also locally referred to as Tokay) has traditionally been associated with very rich, dry white wines that are known for their palate texture and viscosity. Picked quite late, the wines are relatively high in alcohol, low in aroma and almost Chardonnay like in their palate weight, also retaining great palate acidity, with the best examples capable of ageing for considerable periods (up to a decade). This Pinot Gris style may also undergo some wood ageing and yeast work in the winery, making for a creamier, richer wine again.

In direct contrast with this style is traditional Pinot Grigio. As we found out earlier, Pinot Grigio is the Italian name for Pinot Gris, and in Italy it finds a home in Northern Italy, where the plantings have exploded over the last decade, in line with the worldwide popularity of the style. Most of Italy's Pinot Grigio is produced in the Veneto region, where it is made in a very dry, neutral and crisp style that is more Sauvignon Blanc (without the lifted aromatics) in style than the richer Pinot Gris of France. Early picked, quite low in alcohol and almost boring in its neutrality, the best examples are crisp, understated and refreshing food wines. Renowned wine taster James Halliday describes it best:

"Like painting a picture with white paint (NZ winemaker), or losing a blind tasting against Evian (Robert Joseph, UK wine journalist) are my usual reference points for pinot grigio."

So essentially we have two very different wine interpretations, both coming from the same grape, just treated differently. The challenge in much of the new world (ie outside of Europe) is that the stylistic definition between Pinot Gris and Pinot Grigio is blurred - lean Pinot Gris, rich ripe Pinot Grigio and a lake of watery rubbish in between.

The greatest successes of the variety have largely come from the cooler climate regions of Australia: Yarra Valley, Mornington Peninsula, Adelaide Hills & Tasmania. In New Zealand the variety has found success in Martinborough in the North Island & Marlborough, Central Otago & Canterbury in the South Island. Mostly it is the Pinot Gris (French) style that is favoured (arguably as it is the more interesting of the two), with Pinot Grigio largely relegated to much more commercial level wines.

If ever there was a wine that requires you to read the tasting notes before purchasing, it is Pinot Gris (or is that Grigio)!

Andrew Graham

Winemaking - Scourge or Saviour (Part 2)

- The final rounds -

In this issue we continue our look at winemaking and the application of technology in the winery, further examining the contrasting notions of 'natural' 'non-interventionist' winemaking vs 'modern' winemaking via an old fashioned death match - Old World vs New World, Man vs Machine, Tradition vs Science in a battle for supremacy. (To understand more about this contest, read the first instalment)

In these final rounds we will see the two opposing sides battle it out on the issues of maturation vessels, filtration & closures, with the 'natural' approach fighting against the big guns of technology.

Round 4 of this fight is all about maturation and the rise of the now ubiquitous stainless steel tank

Traditionally, all wine was matured in oak - white, red, rose everything, all would see the inside of an oak barrel at one time or another, if only for a short period, as this was the main way to store & mature wine. In traditional winemaking, these barrels where usually old as to impart minimal oak flavour on the finished wine and allow the terroir to shine. The barrels themselves also allow a small amount of oxygen to permeate through the staves, with the resultant low level oxidation serving to soften the wine, with the oak barrels also giving structure. The problem is that oak maturation & aromatic intense don't always go hand in hand, with the light, delicate fragrance of wines like Riesling or Gewurtztraminer not benefiting from any oak influence.

In a modern winery, the same maturation can take place in a sterile stainless steel tank - a sealed vessel that has only a very limited ingress of oxygen and can be cleaned to the point of food grade sterility. The wines that are produced in stainless steel tank end up with much more pronounced 'crisper' flavours, no 'off' aromas and often show more 'fresh fruit' characters than those produced using oak barrels, but can conversely lack the complexity & inherent structure.

The introduction of stainless steel as a fermentation, maturation & storage vessel has been a boon for the producers of crisp dry white styles, particularly those who are looking for heightened aromatics and maximum freshness. Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc, Clare Valley Riesling & Hunter Valley Semillon may not have scaled the heights of popularity without stainless steel tanks. Stainless steel tanks have also helped preserve the freshness of Unwooded Chardonnay & revitalised Rose, not to mention brighten up many early drinking red wines.

Round 4 Results - Score the win to technology here. Any winery that wants fresh whites, roses or light reds needs a stainless tank simply to compete. Red wine producers need not apply.
Winner: Technology

Round 5 and its smackdown time for technology, with some highly controversial aces up the sleeve to take this round. But the traditions of 'natural' winemaking make a comeback in this round, and the main proponents aren't who you would expect....

We could roughly call this round 'filtration' as these techniques fall under the banner of serving to remove certain elements from a solution, but it goes a little deeper than that.

Traditionally winemakers used (amongst other things) cheese cloth to filter their wines - allowing for the removal of seeds, stems and other residue. Filtration, even in this basic form, has been part of the winemaking process for a considerable time, mainly attempting to remove solids from the final product.

In a modern winery however, filtration has taken on a whole different form, with the wine industry now having to conform to the strictly controlled hygiene & sanity standards found in the food industry, with the expectation of quality product that is implied by these standards. Filtration in a modern winery serves two purposes then - clarification & microbial stabilization. In clarification, larger particles are removed to enhance the appearance of the wine, whilst microbial stabilisation serves to remove yeast & bacterial organisms which, if left in the wine, could lead to spoilage or, at the very worst, re-fermentation (and the odd exploding bottle!)

Clarification is de-reguer for white wines & openly embraced by many more 'traditional' winemakers, allowing for any cloudiness to be effectively removed, often with the use of very natural products (like egg whites or Isinglass - A derivative of fish swim bladders) however it must be noted that most young wines, if left for long enough, may reach the same levels of clarity naturally.

Microbial stabilization though is particularly intensive (and invasive), as it requires a filtration of at least 0.65 micrometers to be effective. The trade off is that at this size, there is considerable chance that colour, tannin & flavour can be removed in the process. Thus modern wineries invest considerable amounts into filtration devices in an attempt to create stable wines that haven't been stripped of their goodies in the process.

Interestingly the main push against filtration of this nature has actually come from a very unlikely source - the beating heart of the new world wine industry: Super premium red winemakers of the Napa Valley in California & the Barossa Valley in Australia. It is these cutting edge 'cult' producers who have picked up on the sentiment that filtration can strip flavours and colours & whom now label their wines as 'unfiltered'. This perhaps serves to instil some 'natural' winemaking credibility to some wines which are very 'modern' in their winemaking approaches (lavish new oak, considerable winemaking influence etc..).

The evolution of filtration though has taken an entirely different tact, with some of the latest technology in the winery rewriting the rules. In this case, it is reverse osmosis and spinning cone column processes: Two very exotic gadgets that use specialise membranes or high tech 'spinners' to separate wine into its various components - water, alcohol, juice etc.., then remove what they don't want before putting the wine back together again.
Some of the ways these technologies have been used is to concentrate grape juices (by removing water) and make more intense wines; to remove excess alcohol (if the grapes got too ripe) or even to remove the flavour and aromas of 'smoke taint' (as experienced in a few bushfire prone Victorian regions over recent vintages).

This ability - to break wine down to a molecular component level is arguably a phenomenal scientific advance, as is argued by the modern winemaker, or is conversely a horrible Frankenstein-like attempt to fiddle with nature, as argued by the 'natural', 'non interventionist' winemaker.

The argument for and against intensive filtration is muddy and complicated - on one hand, there is the desire to produce clean, rich, full flavoured stable wines, on the other there is a desire to produce a wine that is as its maker intends it. What's more is that a small amount of filtration goes a long way... and even the most 'natural' winemaker uses a little.

Round 5 Results - This is a draw, the arguments for both sides are strong and both sides have been known to 'dabble' with the application (or lack of) filtration technology.
Winner: Draw!

Round 6 This final round has been done to death by all and sundry, but we can't have a modern vs traditional winemaking death match without exploring the issue of closures.
A wine closure serves two purposes - as both a containment (keep the wine in) and preservation (keep everything else out) device.

Traditionally, wine bottles were sealed exclusively with cork. sourced solely from Portugal. The cork used in the production of wine corks is actually a product from the bark of the cork tree, with the production of wine corks a rather lengthy process - the tree itself must be a minimum of 25 yrs old for cork production, with the harvested cork requiring 8-12 months of seasoning before it is even considered for use. Cork was used as a closure as it naturally expands to form an air tight closure that both preserves and contains the wine in the bottle.

There are however a few problems with cork. Firstly, the big one: TCA or 2,4,6 - Trichloranisole, a compound that is produced by a reaction between the chlorine used to sterilise natural cork & a mould found in wood products. TCA affects a wine by giving it a mouldy, wet hessian type aroma and flattening the flavours on the palate. This cork taint is generally thought to affect somewhere between 2-5% of all wines sealed with cork seals, although that figure varies wildly according to which source you are quoting.
Another, less recognised problem is what is known as random oxidation - where the cork fails in its job as a preserver, letting oxygen into the wine and prematurely ageing the contents. When you add these two faults together (Random oxidation is estimated to run at between 1-3%) we have a significant problem with cork closures.

The modern winery (and plenty of traditional producers are taking the plunge now too) have comprehensibly embraced alternative closures. The most predominant of these is the screwcap - a screw on, metal cap that is already used in many other adaptations - from Tomato sauce to Vodka bottles. The advantage of a screwcap is that it is a manufactured, consistent preserver and containment device, with none of the possible taints associated with cork.
Another seal that has arisen as a potential premium closure is the glass stopper, which has already been adopted by some German producers as it seems a quite natural addition to 'glass' wine bottles (looks good too).

Perhaps the only major drawback to screwcaps is that they don't 'pop' like corks do, removing some of the romance associated with the popping of corks. But with even some of the top Bordeaux Château's (producing expensive 'old world' wines) confirming that they are trialling screwcaps, it looks like the days of cork are numbered. The only real retort from the cork loving, 'natural' winemakers has been that screwcaps are such an efficient seal, that wine cannot mature in the bottle like cork sealed examples, as there is no natural, minute oxygen ingress (as experienced with corks).

This writer can attest to the redundant nature of this theory, with a recent tasting of two 1998 Richmond Grove Clare Valley Rieslings confirming that wine will mature as steadily under 'screw' as it does under its cork sealed brothers (the screwcapped wine was much 'fresher' too).

Round 6 Results - Consider this: If 3-5% of our milk went off because of a dodgy lid, and there was a more effective lid that was almost a dollar cheaper and worked every time, what would the logical move be?
Winner: Technology
Andrew Graham

For another perspective on this debate, read this excellent article by Ric Einstein
(The Other Red Bigot)

Modern Winemaking - Scourge or Saviour

Following on the heals of our look at the complexities of terroir, in the next two issues we will take a closer look at winemaking & the application of technology in the winery - An area where Australia leads the world, yet also a highly contentious & contradictory issue within the global wine industry, with two very different viewpoints played out on different sides of the world – Traditional (old world European) vs Modern (new world – everywhere else).

On one stereotypical side of this argument you have the ultra traditional, 'non interventionist' style purists who rely on what could be classed as 'archaic' winemaking practises that are absolutely time honoured & 'natural' yet prone to very inconsistent results. Indeed some of the worlds most expensive wines are produced via this method, but also some of the most expensive flops!

The other extreme then is the scientific winemaker who utilises science and technology to produce the wine they want, effectively controlling the chemical & physiological processes involved in wine production to get a much more consistent, if overly homogeneous & 'industrial' result, lacking the soul of the traditional winemaking process, yet making much more consistent wines.

The reality is that most wineries sit somewhere in the middle of this battle, utilising the best of the old and the new world in the quest for vinous glory. What’s more, many old world producers have wholly embraced modern winemaking (just look at the raft of Aussie winemakers plying their trade in Southern France every Aussie winter) and plenty of New World producers who make their wines in a very traditional manner (Like McLaren Vale producer D’Arenberg who foot tread grapes and use century old basket presses).

In many ways, this argument pits man against machine in a grudge match that is the symbolism of our modern era – Art vs Science, Tradition vs Technology. Which way produces the finest wine? We've decided to test this out with an old fashioned ruckus:

Round 1 of this traditional vs modern winemaking fight is set in the vineyard. We will ignore the viticultural (grape growing) side, as this is a whole separate dilemma (see biodynamic & organic wines) and may well influence the result (after all, great wine is made in the vineyard - or is that the winery?)

Traditionally, grapes are picked by hand in whole bunches and remain this way until they get to the winery. This preserves the integrity of the grapes themselves, can enhance the freshness and allow for only top quality, ripe grapes to be picked. Hand picking is though limited by the human element - requiring a large, costly workforce and is largely limited to daylight hours (or whenever pickers can be found). Hand picking is essential when whole bunch fermentation is required (such as in the production of Pinot Noir & fine bottle fermented sparklings).

Conversely, the modern option is machine harvesting - machine harvesting is efficient and effective at harvesting large tracts of vineyards in a very short space of time, day or night. The problem with machine harvesting though is that it is very hard on both the grapes and the vine - with the vine literally beaten of its grapes, increasing the chance of berry splitting (which can lead to oxidation - the enemy of fresh aromatic whites). Machines are also indiscriminate - they will take all the grapes, regardless of their condition and include plenty of nefarious material with it. This can be combated by sorting in the winery, but considering the logistics of machine harvesting are not all that condusive to hand sorting, it rarely happens (especially with large volumes).

Round 1 Result: Handpicking wins for quality, but not efficiency. Machine Harvesting wins for convenience. Handpicking is essential for some varieties, but when it starts to really rain at harvest time, the machine harvesters can be the only way to get your fruit off in a hurry. Many winemakers in Coonawarra still use machine harvesting but they are the exception, as most premium wines are made by hand picking. Winner: Tradition

After an exchange of body blows, we move onto Round 2 & it is fermentation time – Time to convert grape juice into wine:

The traditional fermentation method is largely to let the wine begin fermenting on its own accord – with the naturally occurring yeasts found on grape skins, in the atmosphere or in the vats serving to start fermentation of grape sugars into alcohol 'naturally'. Natural yeast fermentation is thought to give more complexity to finished wines, with yeasts performing unpredictably & hence producing ‘wilder’ more pronounced flavours and less obvious alcohol (as wild yeasts are less efficient at turning sugar into alcohol). It is this unpredictability though which is the major downside of wild yeast fermentation – just one of the ambient yeasts floating around a winery can be working against the winemaker, producing off aromas or not working at all, resulting in a fermentation that dozen’t quite work like it should, leaving a stinky, semi sweet final wine that is largely undrinkable.
Some wineries have naturally occurring yeast strains that are consistent enough to allow them to naturally ferment every year (or their makers know exactly what tricks to use to make them consistent) but it is still regarded as a somewhat risky process.

Contrast this to the modern winemaking method, which involves the use of a cultured yeast in the fermentation process. Cultured yeasts are still all natural products, yet are cultured in a controlled label. They then can be ordered in bulk and added when appropriate (there are even yeast catalogues!). Wineries even cultivate their very own strain of yeast to be used in their wines – leading to similar characters in all the wines of a single maker (good for ‘house style’). The main advantage of cultured yeasts is their consistent results, producing ‘safe’ ferments that are clean and efficient, with nary a off aroma in sight. Cultured yeasts are particularly useful in the production of aromatic white wines – Sauvignon Blanc, Riesling etc.. The main disadvantage is, again, the homogeneity – cultured yeasts provide safe wines that may lack the complexity of their ‘natural’ brothers.

Round 2 Result: Small scale producers will go the natural ferment as they have much less to lose. On a larger scale, natural ferments are seen as an overtly risky 'unclean' proposition. Some large scale producers get around this by separating their wines into 'batches', allowing for individual parcels of grape juice to undergo natural fermentation (so if a batch goes astray there is little worry). Wild yeast ultimately wins for complexity though (and complex wines are uniformly the hgihest quality wines)
Winner: Tradition!
Andrew Graham

Next Issue: The Final Rounds - Winery Gadgets, Filtration & Closures

How do they make Champagne Bubbly?

Have you ever stopped and wondered how Champagne gets (and keeps) its bubbles? Most people assume that it is produced by using the same technique as used for making soft drink - An injection of carbon dioxide bubbles into a still wine.

In reality, sparkling wine is traditionally made via three sometimes laborious methods, with a sliding scale of effort suitably matched to the intended final style (and price) - Only very cheap 'passion pop' styled bubblies are produced by the aforementioned carbon dioxide injection. The CO2 injection method is used as it is the simplest & cheapest, but produces large, coarse bubbles that dissipate quickly in the glass.

The second method is known as the 'charmat' or tank method and is most commonly used for the production of fruity sparkling wines where freshness is the key (such as the Italian sparkling Prosecco). This process involves a secondary fermentation that takes place in a pressurised stainless steel tank. The resultant bubbles (called the bead) are smaller and finer than the injection method but nowhere near as constant or long lasting as those bubblies produced using the bottle fermentation method below.

The final method is known as the traditional method (or Methode Champenoise) which French Champagne and most premium sparkling wines are produced by. This lengthy, labour intensive process involves a secondary fermentation in bottle and maturation process that can last up to 10 yrs for some super premium Champagne, producing the highest quality sparkling wines with the finest, most persistent bead.

Step by Step Sparkling Wine Production

1 In the vineyard
As the proverb says, great wine is made in the vineyard: Sparkling wine is no exception. Most grapes used in the production of sparkling wine are picked earlier than their still counterparts (except for sparkling red, but that is a whole other story) with the aim to retain high levels of natural grape acidity and create a refreshing sparkling wine.

If we are creating a traditional French Champagne style sparkling there are only three grape varieties that are used: Pinot Noir, Chardonnay & Pinot Meunier. However sparkling wine can be made from just about anything - From Sauvignon Blanc to Durif to Chambourcin.

Picking for sparkling wine is often done by hand and at night time to minimise oxidation & preserve the inherent crisp freshness. In Champagne this is taken to the next level wit press houses located in amongst the vines to attempt to get the graps in and crushed as soon as possible.

2. Making the Base Wine
Once in the winery the grapes are crushed and fermented like any other still wine with the yeast (natural or added) converting grape sugars into alcohol. Once this still wine is produced it can be blended with different base wines from different vineyards (or different years) to form a master blend - known as a cuvée. At this stage the base wine may simply be injected with carbon dioxide and bottled immediately if a low budget sparkling wine is the aim, or follow on to the steps below for higher quality examples.

3.Secondary Fermentation
After this the base cuvée has a mixture of yeast and sugar added which serves to start a secondary fermentation process - creating bubbles of carbon dioxide, which are gradually integrated into the wine over a period of time (making for smaller, finer & more persistent bubbles). This second ferment can take place in a tank (Charmat method) or will take place in the individual bottle (Traditional method).
With the Charmat method, the sparkling wine is bottled quite quickly (3 weeks to 3 months) after this secondary fermentation to aid in freshness (albeit with less bottle pressure and less persistent bubbles). If we are using the traditional method the bottle is then sealed with a crown seal and sent off for maturation on lees.

4.Ageing on Yeast Lees
The next stage in the sparkling production process can take the most time, but is the most crucial in the production of complex, premium bubbly. Once the yeast cells used in the second ferment run out of sugar to feed on, they simply starve and die in the bottle. However, their usefulness does not stop there, with the wine drawing more flavour out of the dead yeast cells (known as yeast lees) the longer they are in contact. This process is known as yeast autolysis - a poorly understood chemical process that serves to give top Champagne the lovely bready, creamy, yeast derived flavour that it is renowned for. Ageing on yeast lees is compulsory for French Champagne (15 months minimum) and can last for a decade plus in the finest vintage wines.

5.Riddling
Once the wine has spent its requisite time ageing on its yeast lees, we need to remove the lees from the bottle (or end up with cloudy sparkling). This was traditionally done over a six week period by hand, with the bottles gradually turned from a horizontal position to inverted vertical by human 'riddlers' - using a special wooden riddling rack called a 'pupitre' (Like those in the photo above). These days the task is covered by a 'gyropalette' which looks like a massive wine carton, mechanically inverting the bottles and then vigorously shaking the contents - Forcing the yeast lees down into the neck of the bottle.

6.Disgorgement and bottling
The final step in this complex process is delightfully dramatic. The yeast lees now lie in the top of the bottle and we just have to get them out! This is done by dunking the neck of the bottle in a freezing solution, which freezes the bottle neck and the yeast lees with it. The bottles are then upended & opened, with the lees deposit jettisoned out by the pressure contained in the bottle, taking the form of a flying frozen yeast pellet! The bottle is then topped up with a mixture of wine and sugar syrup known as the 'dosage'. The sweetness of the dosage can vary from nil (in Brut Nature or ZD wines for example) up to about 12g/l, depending upon the desired finished style.

The bottle is finally then sealed with a special sparkling cork (Champagne producers are said to get the best cork in the world) with a wire muselet cage ensuring that the approximately six atmospheres of pressure doesn't force the cork off.

A few of our favourite Champagnes produced using the Traditional Method