Cutting Pinot with Syrah in CA: Does it happen?

[Evan Dawson]

In the past week I've listened to a handful of wine-loving friends casually talk about how it's "well known" that some Pinot makers in California - the ones seeker blacker wines with a more syrup-like density - cut their Pinot with small amounts of Syrah.

Here's the problem: I have never heard it acknowledged by a winemaker, and I've never seen it substantiated.

It's easy to fall into the trap of assumption - lots of people say it, so it's true! But I'd like to know what others think, and what others know. It's unfair to winemakers to make such statements or assumptions without evidence. They deserve better.

Author Rex Pickett recently said, on Palate Press, "I know some people around here spike 'em with Syrah."

http://palatepress.com/2011/02/wine/str ... x-pickett/

So enlighten me, if you can. Is it happening?

By the way, it's certainly happening in the Finger Lakes. The best producers are purists. The lesser producers have admitted to me they cut Pinot with Saperavi or other varieties to boost color.

[G. D y e r]

It's like asking if in Burgundy the must is often spiked with sugar to fatten up the wine, though the PR explanation is stuff like "extending the fermentation." Of course it happens! Industrial wineries loves to "extend the color" or "extend the blend" otherwise there'd be no mega purple or no bulk blending wine.

I think it is way more prevalent at the lower levels, though. I've dug up tech sheets on PN like Red Tree (Laube's favorite industrial wine), Chalone and Castle Rock that indicate blending with either 'generic blending wine', Syrah or even Petite Sirah.

But as far as the high end Power Pinots, I'd say that's pretty much what Pinot does under those conditions. Areas like SRH produce atypically thick skins, and vintners can hang the grapes as long as they like pretty much. It doesn't take Syrah to make a Power Pinot.

Actually, I think this style is more Grenache-like, but once something gains traction like this Syrah-Pinot blending story, there's no going back. You're asking people to know more than four grape varieties (Cab, Chard, Pinot, Syrah)--apparently that is too much.

[Rick Wolfe]

There was a thread a while back on "another board" addressing this topic which was rather heated and made my head spin. Are you really sure you want to go there with this one? But it could get interesting...

[Peter Cargasacchi]

As the size of a sphere decreases, the ratio of surface area to volume increases exponentially. You should also look at the effect of sunlight vs. Temperatur/heat on phenolic compounds. Don't forget controlled, water deficits in arid summer/fall regions vs. regions with an abundance of rainfall disguised as "dry farming" for controlling vigor and reducing vegetal character.

But hey, the myths from centuries of selling overcropped swill from short season, hot, northerly latitude, long summer daylength, continental climates, die hard.

[Kevin Harvey]

It might happen at the low end but I bet it is rare or non-existent among wines that people on this board might care about.

There is a lot of misunderstanding about darker Pinot. It is actually the cool sites (not the warm) that typically make darker pinot. Warm sites ripen too fast to accumulate the phenolics that make Pinot dark. Soil and other conditions that affect grape size (as Peter mentioned) also play a role. Picking late might make for a "bigger" wine but late picked Pinot can still be red fruited.

The real irony of the situation is that the French have created a qualitative hierarchy (Grand Cru, 1er cru, Village etc) that values concentration yet many seem to think that New World Pinot should have the intensity of the low level wines rather than Grand Crus. I think this situation is created in part because people do not typically drink the Grand Crus when young and instead cellar them until the fruit has receded somewhat.

[Al Osterheld]

I think it was common to blend other grapes with Pinot Noir in California back in the 1960's and 1970's (although, not with syrah, of course). But I also think it's very rare today with anything but low end, value bottlings. Color and concentration are generally not hard to get in California and if you have a Pinot that needs a bit more character, it seems more sensible to blend with another Pinot.

Not sure whether you've visited California very much, Evan. If not, come out around harvest and visit some Pinot vineyards and producers. I think you'll conclude there isn't much reason for the suspicions.

-Al

[Evan Dawson]

I think it was common to blend other grapes with Pinot Noir in California back in the 1960's and 1970's (although, not with syrah, of course). But I also think it's very rare today with anything but low end, value bottlings. Color and concentration are generally not hard to get in California and if you have a Pinot that needs a bit more character, it seems more sensible to blend with another Pinot.

Not sure whether you've visited California very much, Evan. If not, come out around harvest and visit some Pinot vineyards and producers. I think you'll conclude there isn't much reason for the suspicions.

-Al

Al,

I've been to Napa / Sonoma / RRV quite a bit, but never during harvest. Good idea.

And to be clear, I don't harbor much in the way of suspicions. More just musing on how often I hear it from others, and then reading Pickett's comment, etc.

[Ken Zinns (Online)]

It certainly happens on some lower-end Pinots, but as Kevin noted, it's got to be pretty rare in the higher-end California Pinots that most of us here care about. I can't say that it never happens, although I have not heard a believable case of it being done with higher-end Pinot. As several have already noted here, it's not tough to get darker color in Pinot Noir here.

Yet there continue to be people who are utterly convinced that blending Syrah into higher-end Pinots in California is common practice. And of course, they offer no actual evidence of that. I've argued with people about this subject on other wine boards before - there was one person who posted some hearsay from an anonymous Syrah grower that they apparently thought was the "smoking gun" but which in reality sounded so far-fetched that it was laughable. And that was about as close to substantiating these rumors as I've ever seen or heard.

[Brett Johnson]

It might happen at the low end but I bet it is rare or non-existent among wines that people on this board might care about.

There is a lot of misunderstanding about darker Pinot. It is actually the cool sites (not the warm) that typically make darker pinot. Warm sites ripen too fast to accumulate the phenolics that make Pinot dark. Soil and other conditions that affect grape size (as Peter mentioned) also play a role. Picking late might make for a "bigger" wine but late picked Pinot can still be red fruited.

Great point Kevin.

[Bob Wood]

Kent Dorfman: "Oh, wow. This is gonna be GREAT!"

[MitchTallan]

Big yawn.
The only reason I am posting is to say this; IMHO it's high time California revisited it's labeling laws away from the 75% rule to 100%. Any deviation from 100% should be disclosed on the label. Topping of barrels should be restricted to the same variety from the same vintage. Obviously, wineries could cheat regardless of the rules, but it would give pause to most wineries/winemakers. The consumer deserves the information in return for their hard earned dollar.

[dave kammerer]

One of the Au Bon Climat bottlings lists the addition of another varietal on the front label but the more expensive bottlings do not.

[Brady Daniels]

Big yawn.
The only reason I am posting is to say this; IMHO it's high time California revisited it's labeling laws away from the 75% rule to 100%. Any deviation from 100% should be disclosed on the label. Topping of barrels should be restricted to the same variety from the same vintage. Obviously, wineries could cheat regardless of the rules, but it would give pause to most wineries/winemakers. The consumer deserves the information in return for their hard earned dollar.

Mitch, what would you want a blended wine to be called, just Red Table Wine? Some of the board darlings blend. Just as a single example, I have no problem with Mike Officer adding a little Carignane or pet to an appellation Zin if he thinks it makes the wine better. And of course most of his SVD Zins are field blends. Should they not be called Zinfandel?

Funnily enough, I also want my Pinots to be 100% Pinot, but drastic changes to the laws can have unintended consequences.

[Scott Manlin]

We joked (and emphasis on joked) that SYV would need add Pinot to the Syrah this year (2010) to give the syrah ripeness and body....

I have never met a winemaker who has indicated they do that... nor would I think it a good idea. At least in SBC, you can get all the ripeness and body you want out of pinot noir. It is a challenge to get less. There are a few cooler climate syrah sites that produce some really lovely CA syrah. The warmer sites certainly produce bigger wines which I suppose you could add to pinot to build it up, but ripeness doesn't seem to be much of concern in CA as it is in France for pinot. But the great Sonoma pinots don't strike me as needing a lift either....

[larry schaffer]

Big yawn.
The only reason I am posting is to say this; IMHO it's high time California revisited it's labeling laws away from the 75% rule to 100%. Any deviation from 100% should be disclosed on the label. Topping of barrels should be restricted to the same variety from the same vintage. Obviously, wineries could cheat regardless of the rules, but it would give pause to most wineries/winemakers. The consumer deserves the information in return for their hard earned dollar.

Mitch,

Interesting take. How would you go about changing international law so that everyone else would adhere to the same standards? I think from a consumer standpoint, this would be very important.

That said, there are so many other things that wineries and winemakers do NOT need to disclose on labels - acid/water additions, spinning cone use, velcorin or filtration, other additions - that can have as big if not bigger effects on the finished wines than just the varieties that are blended in.

Cheers.

[Tim Corliss]

[Cris Whetstone]

It might happen at the low end but I bet it is rare or non-existent among wines that people on this board might care about.

There is a lot of misunderstanding about darker Pinot. It is actually the cool sites (not the warm) that typically make darker pinot. Warm sites ripen too fast to accumulate the phenolics that make Pinot dark. Soil and other conditions that affect grape size (as Peter mentioned) also play a role. Picking late might make for a "bigger" wine but late picked Pinot can still be red fruited.

The real irony of the situation is that the French have created a qualitative hierarchy (Grand Cru, 1er cru, Village etc) that values concentration yet many seem to think that New World Pinot should have the intensity of the low level wines rather than Grand Crus. I think this situation is created in part because people do not typically drink the Grand Crus when young and instead cellar them until the fruit has receded somewhat.

Great points. Your last paragraph is one that is so very often over looked when some people want to make assumptions about wines from regions. Very often a plus for one region is a negative for another.

There is also issues with the terminology. I've spoken to some people who think concentration is bad because they've come to assume it means big fruit and extraction. I even talked to someone who equated extract with alcohol.

[MitchTallan]

Mitch, what would you want a blended wine to be called, just Red Table Wine? Some of the board darlings blend. Just as a single example, I have no problem with Mike Officer adding a little Carignane or pet to an appellation Zin if he thinks it makes the wine better. And of course most of his SVD Zins are field blends. Should they not be called Zinfandel?

Funnily enough, I also want my Pinots to be 100% Pinot, but drastic changes to the laws can have unintended consequences.

Red blends would require a breakdown of the constituents with corresponding percentages accurate to the tenth decimal place (just joking).

Mitch,

Interesting take. How would you go about changing international law so that everyone else would adhere to the same standards? I think from a consumer standpoint, this would be very important.

That said, there are so many other things that wineries and winemakers do NOT need to disclose on labels - acid/water additions, spinning cone use, velcorin or filtration, other additions - that can have as big if not bigger effects on the finished wines than just the varieties that are blended in.

Cheers.

Larry, I don't care about what they do elsewhere-well I care, but not as much. Back to California, the other things that can be done to wine other than "playing" with the 75% rule is also beyond our control. The fact that those things can and will continue without disclosure doesn't mean the 75% rule has any good purpose other than to serve the wine producers at the expence of the consumer.

[Adam Lee]

You know, out of my 2.75 acres of Hirsch Vineyard Pinot Noir there are a few vines, less than 5, of white grapes. Sometimes these have been picked and mixed in with the wine. Mitch has me make this a red table wine -- thank god he's not in charge at the moment.

But I felt like I should confess this.....now I feel much better.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

[MitchTallan]

You know, out of my 2.75 acres of Hirsch Vineyard Pinot Noir there are a few vines, less than 5, of white grapes. Sometimes these have been picked and mixed in with the wine. Mitch has me make this a red table wine -- thank god he's not in charge at the moment.

But I felt like I should confess this.....now I feel much better.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

Good thing you're not a lawyer, Adam (lucky you). I said that red blends should disclose the breakdown. I did not say that anything less than 100% should be called "Red Blend". One does not equate to the other. If I were the King of California, you could still call your 99% Hirsch Pinot "Hirsch Pinot Noir" but you would have to disclose on the label that you included two grapes worth of whatever your five vines of white happen to be.

[Bob Wood]

What should we have done the year I watched one of our members mistakenly dump one bin of pinot noir into the hopper with the pinot gris?

[Scott Manlin]

What should we have done the year I watched one of our members mistakenly dump one bin of pinot noir into the hopper with the pinot gris?

That is one way to make Pinot rose....

[Bob Wood]

What should we have done the year I watched one of our members mistakenly dump one bin of pinot noir into the hopper with the pinot gris?

That is one way to make Pinot rose....

I've actually seen pinot gris rose. Tasted it, even. If you've ever seen ripe gris you'd know how much color is in the skins, but this one surprised be because it was so pink. A lot of times gris is kinda brown-looking.

[Rick Gregory]

Big yawn.
The only reason I am posting is to say this; IMHO it's high time California revisited it's labeling laws away from the 75% rule to 100%. Any deviation from 100% should be disclosed on the label. Topping of barrels should be restricted to the same variety from the same vintage. Obviously, wineries could cheat regardless of the rules, but it would give pause to most wineries/winemakers. The consumer deserves the information in return for their hard earned dollar.

Mitch,

Interesting take. How would you go about changing international law so that everyone else would adhere to the same standards? I think from a consumer standpoint, this would be very important.

Why would we need to? The 75% standard isn't uniform internationally.

That said, there are so many other things that wineries and winemakers do NOT need to disclose on labels - acid/water additions, spinning cone use, velcorin or filtration, other additions - that can have as big if not bigger effects on the finished wines than just the varieties that are blended in.

Cheers.

Slippery slope of course, but the topic is varietal character and what the customer believes they're buying. As I understand it, I could add 20% Syrah to my Pinot and call it Pinot. I doubt like hell anyone would DO this, but why have a standard that's so lax?

Mitch - your proposal doesn't address the issue, really. If I can call something Pinot but add other things... when do I forfeit the right to call it Pinot Noir? When the non-PN component is 5%? 1%? 25%?

[Scott Manlin]

What should we have done the year I watched one of our members mistakenly dump one bin of pinot noir into the hopper with the pinot gris?

That is one way to make Pinot rose....

I've actually seen pinot gris rose. Tasted it, even. If you've ever seen ripe gris you'd know how much color is in the skins, but this one surprised be because it was so pink. A lot of times gris is kinda brown-looking.

Funny you should mention that... I did see some this year.. more like late harvest pinot gris... some pretty ugly fruit and a gentle crush yielded some sweet, lightly pink juice... with a bit more maceration, I am sure it would take on a more rose like color

[Jim Swayze]

Though slightly amateurish and misleading, here is an on topic article from Sunset magazine:

http://www.sunset.com/food-wine/wine-pa ... 000069475/

[john holdredge]

What should we have done the year I watched one of our members mistakenly dump one bin of pinot noir into the hopper with the pinot gris?

That is one way to make Pinot rose....

I've actually seen pinot gris rose. Tasted it, even. If you've ever seen ripe gris you'd know how much color is in the skins, but this one surprised be because it was so pink. A lot of times gris is kinda brown-looking.

Funny you should mention that... I did see some this year.. more like late harvest pinot gris... some pretty ugly fruit and a gentle crush yielded some sweet, lightly pink juice... with a bit more maceration, I am sure it would take on a more rose like color

Actually you can get pinking in Pinot Gris even with whole cluster pressing. There are a couple products available to stabilize juice to lessen that occurence.

[H Wallace Jr]

[I've actually seen pinot gris rose. Tasted it, even. If you've ever seen ripe gris you'd know how much color is in the skins, but this one surprised be because it was so pink. A lot of times gris is kinda brown-looking.

The one in the middle is our 100% whole cluster fermented Pinot Gris- Picked 9/1 at about 20 brix (11.7% alc). It is a little less vibrant in person, but still wild looking.

[John Morris]

Mitch - your proposal doesn't address the issue, really. If I can call something Pinot but add other things... when do I forfeit the right to call it Pinot Noir? When the non-PN component is 5%? 1%? 25%?

As I understand it, he'd keep the 75% requirement for something to be labeled as a varietal but would require that any wine with less than 100% disclose somewhere on the label what else was in the mix. So you could say "Pinot Noir" on the front, but on the back say "80% Pinot Noir, 20% Ruby Cabernet."

[Rob MacKay]

[I've actually seen pinot gris rose. Tasted it, even. If you've ever seen ripe gris you'd know how much color is in the skins, but this one surprised be because it was so pink. A lot of times gris is kinda brown-looking.

The one in the middle is our 100% whole cluster fermented Pinot Gris- Picked 9/1 at about 20 brix (11.7% alc). It is a little less vibrant in person, but still wild looking.

Who peed in the glass on the right?

[Robert.Fleming (Online)]

One of the Au Bon Climat bottlings lists the addition of another varietal on the front label but the more expensive bottlings do not.

Grape variety, not varietal.

[MitchTallan]

Mitch - your proposal doesn't address the issue, really. If I can call something Pinot but add other things... when do I forfeit the right to call it Pinot Noir? When the non-PN component is 5%? 1%? 25%?

As I understand it, he'd keep the 75% requirement for something to be labeled as a varietal but would require that any wine with less than 100% disclose somewhere on the label what else was in the mix. So you could say "Pinot Noir" on the front, but on the back say "80% Pinot Noir, 20% Ruby Cabernet."

Correct. Thanks.

[Rob MacKay]

So you could say "Pinot Noir" on the front, but on the back say "80% Pinot Noir, 20% Ruby Port"

Corrected for California..

[Rick Gregory]

Mitch - your proposal doesn't address the issue, really. If I can call something Pinot but add other things... when do I forfeit the right to call it Pinot Noir? When the non-PN component is 5%? 1%? 25%?

As I understand it, he'd keep the 75% requirement for something to be labeled as a varietal but would require that any wine with less than 100% disclose somewhere on the label what else was in the mix. So you could say "Pinot Noir" on the front, but on the back say "80% Pinot Noir, 20% Ruby Cabernet."

Correct. Thanks.

Eh. That's window dressing to me. I'd rather move the varietal content up (to about 90%) and disclose. Here's the thing - forgetting the esoterica of labeling laws etc., let's ask what the mainstream wine buyer thinks that they're getting when they buy a bottle of varietally labeled wine. I'd bet most of them would expect that the wine is overwhelmingly that variety. I don't think many would be shocked to hear that 5-10% of their Syrah was blended with Grenache or Zin with Carignane, but I do think that a lot would be surprised to hear that the Cabernet Sauvignon could be 25% something else.

Where does that leave people who want to blend? Use fantasy names. Ridge does this quite successfully with Lytton Springs, Geyserville, etc.

[H Wallace Jr]

Who peed in the glass on the right?

See that cat? That's how we get both smell and color in our SB... Might have to disclose that on the label now... drat!