An interesting article re 100% Whole Cluster Pinot Noir discussion

From the PinotFile newsletter, Volume 11, Issue 25 June 26, 2018
Editorial comments are by Rusty Gaffney

100% Whole Cluster Pinot Noir: Upping the Ante

The fermentation of the entire grape cluster including the stem that attaches the berries to the vine, is commonly referred to as stem inclusion, bunch inclusion or whole cluster inclusion. De-stemming machinery is bypassed, leaving all the berries and attached stems intact. The Burgundians practiced 100% whole cluster inclusion for centuries as historically they had no de-stemmers. With the introduction of mechanical de-stemmers about 60 years ago, whole cluster fermentation was largely abandoned worldwide, or limited to fermentation of a small percentage of clusters.
Today, a higher percentage of whole cluster fermentation is more fashionable, and there is renewed interest both in Burgundy and stateside. That said, it’s use in Pinot Noir vinification remains controversial, a wild card in the winemaker’s tool box that is a bit of a gamble. It is high stakes, stressful winemaking that can thoroughly enhance or dreadfully detract from a finished wine. There are no scientific, well-controlled studies that have shown reproducible effects, only considerable anecdotal opinions.
Professor Roger Boulton of UC Davis has pointed out that the contributions of whole cluster fermentation are at least due to two aspects: the intact berries of the whole cluster and the extraction and adsorption properties of the stems. The first is known as carbonic maceration where the berry cells undergo a biochemical modification internally (intra-berry anaerobic fermentation) producing a lifted fresh fruit-candy character. The inclusion of stems are the best vehicle for ensuring a higher percentage of whole berries. The second aspect is less clearly understood, but it is well known that the inclusion of stems can potentially give the wine a green or herbaceous character, presumably from the release of organic methoxypyrazine compounds from stems.

Those winemakers who employ or at least experiment with whole cluster fermentation point out many perceived advantages:
(1) Added perfume of spice, pine sap, forest floor, black tea, rose petal, burnt tobacco. Winemaker Jeff Fink says, “The aromatics can be thrilling and literally spine-tingling. There can be a purity, depth and freshness to the bouquet that almost defies description.” Aromatics in Pinot Noir is the most challenging component to capture and whole cluster fermentation can potentially meet this challenge.
(2) Changes in tannin structure and added tannins. Kevin Harvey, owner of Rhys Vineyards, remarks, “Speaking organoleptically…. the stems contribute some silky smooth mid-palate tannins while preventing the harsh seed tannin from being released since the grape remains encapsulated longer.” Also, the added tannins may contribute to the improved longevity of the wine.
(3) Slower fermentation by dissipating heat. Winemaker Jim Schultze of Windy Oaks Winery & Vineyards notes, “Fermentation temperatures are lower with 100% whole cluster fermentation, no doubt extending the fermentation, but also resulting in a different flavor profile.”
(4) More carbonic maceration (whole intra-berry fermentation) contributing to cooler and longer fermentations as well as markedly affecting the aroma and flavor profile.
(5) Stability of the wine improved. For example, the stability of the wine’s color is increased because pigment is bound with tannin.
(6) Lower final ABV. This is thought to be due in part to the stems releasing water during fermentation and pressing. This effect has never been quantified.
(7) Added freshness to older Pinot Noir wines. Winemaker Ted Lemon told me, “A Pinot Noir that is ten years old and has a percentage of whole cluster will be more aromatically complex than the same wine that is 100% de-stemmed.
(8) Added element of intrigue, uniqueness and evocative character. Winemaker Jeff Fink says, “Clearly, stems rock!” Winemaker Dave Keatley decried, “Whole cluster wines, when they click are luscious, profound and cerebral.”
Those winemakers who decline to employ whole cluster fermentation point out several disadvantages:
(1) Potential for green, herbaceous and vegetative aromas and flavors from stem methoxypyrazines and other compounds, variously described as green beans, snap peas, broccoli, tomato leaves, green bell pepper, green tobacco, unlit cigar tobacco.
(2) Potential for chalky astringency, bitterness and harsh tannins. That said, in general, most winemakers report that the increase in pH and presence of partial carbonic maceration tends to produce softer tannins in some cases.
(3) Less intense color. Not universally observed and some winemakers note no reduction in pigmentation and even darker wines following whole cluster fermentation.
(4) Increased potassium in the ferment and resulting increased pH. This may require acidification of the wine and loss of natural winemaking protocol.
(5) Whole cluster fermentation can dominate the vineyard character. That said, others would argue that there is actually more expression of site (terroir).
(6) The success of whole cluster fermentation is dependent on a multitude of factors including region, vineyard site (not all vineyards can be successfully fermented with 100% whole cluster), clones (some clones seem better suited to whole cluster fermentation such as Swan but the science is not known), and vintage. It is often the winemaker’s intuition that determines whether stems from a particular vineyard will impact the wine positively or negatively.
(7) New World palates are fruit-centric and the savory elements whole cluster fermentation brings to Pinot Noir may not find widespread commercial appreciation or appeal.
(8) The whole cluster fermentation process is more labor intensive and requires more attention than a de-stemmed wine. Pneumatic punch down devices and pump-overs cannot be employed as they can release more astringency into the ferment.
(9) The winemaker’s imprint and whole cluster character can be a dominating feature of the wine.
The controversy over the use of whole clusters in fermentation is centered on stem lignification. The view of many winemakers has been that the stems have to be mature, woody and brown (lignified) at harvest for whole cluster fermentation to be advantageous. The thought has been that if the stems are not lignified, they can add more undesirable harsh green tannins and herbaceous characters.
Some have challenged this line of reasoning by pointing out that lignification is the hardening and firming up of cells in the stem, not a turning brown of the stem. That is, the stems may still be bright green, even when they are lignified appropriately. Others would claim the critical factor is the amount of sap in the stem and not its degree of lignification. Winemaker Carlo Mondavi of RAEN Winery has said, “Waiting for full brown stems is a major mistake in my opinion….if you wait that long you are looking at harvesting well north of 25º Brix. This can yield a wine of incredible bitterness and a pH that is not amenable to fermentation as well as a wine that is unstable naturally. I make our cuts where the rachis (stem) meets the shoot, an area that is brown and lignified. We make our harvesting cuts right in the middle of the browning area to minimize sap flowing into the juice.” Vineyards with well-drained rocky soils and lacking in late season rainfall tend to perform better with whole cluster fermentation since there is less tendency for the vine to push sap and water into the cluster.
There are currently three basic camps domestically with regard to whole cluster fermentation. By far the largest group of winemakers completely de-stem prior to fermentation. The second largest group of winemakers like to add some percentage of whole clusters, say 10-30% up to 50% depending on numerous factors. Some in this group produce a limited bottling of 100% whole cluster Pinot Noir. The third and smallest number of winemakers are committed to 100% whole cluster fermentation if feasible in all their wines. Whole cluster has become a badge of courage and accomplishment and many winemakers include the words “whole cluster” on their appropriate wines.
Where do I stand on whole cluster? I seem to prefer Pinot Noir wines with at least some whole cluster inclusion and a majority of my favorite domestic wines over the past forty years have been ones with at least some whole cluster inclusion.

An interesting article. Thanks for it.

I think it important when discussing whole cluster to specificy whether berries are crushed before pressing (intentionally or “unintentionally”), and if so, to what extent and how long before pressing. “Whole cluster” by itself really just describes how the fruit went into the fermentor, and says virtually nothing about actions thereafter.

Much of what is written tracks well with my own experience. I’ve bounced around on the matter, and prefer @ 20-30% whole cluster in my Pinot, and a bit more (up to 50%) in our Zweigeltrebe.
I avoid going full whole cluster because of negative points 1, 2, and 5/9 (the two being more or less one issue). All are important considerations given our cold climate fruit.

Thanks for sharing this article - and I dig it’s completeness without ‘bias’.

There are plenty of things we ‘know’ about whole cluster ferments and plenty of ‘conventional wisdoms’ out there as well, and this covers them. From loss of color (something I’ve never seen) to the stems need to be lignified (nope), this does a great job of covering them.

And Bruce’s point is well taken. I heavily foot stomp the clusters on day 1 - I’m in each 1/2 ton bin for 15 minutes or so - and then do punch downs from then on. I know others do pumpovers instead to try to keep as many clusters ‘intact’ as possible - something I am NOT trying to do.

Even though I don’t make Pinot, I DO 100% whole cluster ferments on ALL of my reds (beginning in 2014) with most of my 2013s being 100% as well. Is it too much? Well - to me, stems are no different than any other ‘factor’ of wine - if something ‘sticks out too much’, it is therefore not integrated. It could be stems; it could be oak usage; it could be alcohol; it could be acid. The ‘challenge’ is to create ‘balanced’ wines and stems allow me to add ‘structure’ organically instead of blending or using new oak.

I am of the camp that believes that stems can enhance varietal character and a sense of place rather than ‘override’ or ‘overwhelm’ them.

It’ll be interesting to hear what others have to say about this article and their like/dislike of stem inclusion, not only with pinots but with other varieties as well.

Cheers.

A classmate at UCD did a thesis study on the effects of whole cluster in PN ferments, and the only take home lessons I remember were:
-slightly lower color, due to absorption of color by stems
-slightly lower soluble solids, due to some slight expression of low sugar liquid from stems (?)
-higher pH

This was done over 35 years ago (yeah, I’m that old… not ‘Tom Hill Old’, but still…) so I can’t remember the author’s name (Dennis ______). And there are many old research findings that have been over-turned by more recent, more elegant testing. But, there is that.

I do, too. Except, of course, in those cases where it doesn’t.
Hokkaido Pinot noir is rather fragile stuff… most years we barely get to 12% alcohol. And the fruit profile is similarly delicate. Whole cluster in any large percentage tends to crowd out site typicity. I can easily imagine that if I were using Cal-grown Rhone varieties I’d feel very different about ‘proper’ percentages for balanced wine.


Regards,

Edited addition:
We have typically separated our ferments into 100% whole cluster and 100% hand de-stemmed. The blend percentages can be adjusted by simply choosing how many tanks are WC and how many are de-stemmed.
Our whole cluster ferments are very whole cluster… we use small volume fermentors (largest are 2 kL size), and don’t work the grapes much at all… usually no pump-overs, no punch downs. We may jump in the tank after CM phase is complete (3 weeks?) and lightly crush by foot a few days before pressing. But that’s about all we’ve done.
We’ve separated the WC and de-stemmed lots to understand the effect of WC on our fruit. In the future, I see us moving more towards mixed ferments, with percentages of WC v. de-stemmed decided for each tank.

Whole cluster makes it go to 11.

Or hell, 11.3.

BTW, did you do whole cluster on that great Syrah? If so, I’m all for it!

Even though I don’t make Pinot, I DO 100% whole cluster ferments on ALL of my reds

Larry - have you done any side by side comparisons or did you just decide to go all in? I’m not against it at all, especially as it’s more “natural” and all, just curious. And does that mean your Cab Franc is whole cluster?

Great article–thanks Blake.
I do like a bit of whole cluster in PN.

(7) Added freshness to older Pinot Noir wines. Winemaker Ted Lemon told me, “A Pinot Noir that is ten years old and has a percentage of whole cluster will be more aromatically complex than the same wine that is 100% de-stemmed.

Henri Jayer is rolling over in his grave.

I think while cluster fermentation is largely misunderstood and even winemakers employing it, such as myself, get results that sometimes can be unanticipated (both good and bad) or unusual. There is a learning process every vintage but vintages come around 1x/year so you get what you get and have to wait 300+ days to give it a go again.

We have routinely moved to more whole cluster fermentations and so far more 100% whole cluster than we used to. As a generalization over more than 100 fermenters from 2017 (and based upon passed experience) that the higher the whole cluster percentage the better, more complex, more interesting and more vineyard based the wine is. There are exceptions, of course, which I think is normal in a process as wide-ranging as wine fermentation can be. In the small number of instances where destemmed wines are better than the whole cluster version I think I have future solutions to temper issues.

The only thing I think I believe about the mass generalizations is the pH increase that can and most certainly does occur especially if you start with elevated pHs. Color? It can be anything just like any other wine. Tannins? Like any fermentation they will be influenced by numerous factors. I do think, properly executed, there are more dynamic and fine-grained tannins in whole cluster ferments but it is not a guarantee.

It’s certainly a personal thing. We have 100% whole cluster wines where you can tell that is the case and we have other wines where you cannot. In general though our best wines come from higher whole cluster fermentation sources.

The Syrah is 100% whole cluster.

Well I have to say, that was a success!

Jim’s comments make sense. Not being a wine maker, I’m thinking it’s much like anything else - you have to do a little experimenting to find out what effect you’re going to get and how much of it. I’ve tried to pick it out blind and haven’t had any success that way.

Greg,

I have done side by sides in the past and there have always been potential ‘positives’ and ‘negatives’ to whole cluster vs non whole cluster ferments. That said, for the types of wines that I produce and for the varieties that I work with, I believe whole cluster works well, and as I said before, helps me build ‘structure’ without blending or using new oak.

And yes, the 2016 aberration, which is 100% cab franc and aged in stainless, is indeed 100% whole cluster.

Cheers.

I agree Larry, structure without oak. Very well put.

Here a thread from 2016

Here is another article by Kelli White.

Im also in the camp of liking a bit of whole cluster, but as it has been expressed herein, its sometimes difficult to recognize it as being such. Jim Clendenen does some whole cluster inclusion in wines that I am exceptionally fond of and can identify that they are made that way. I know I’ve missed this in other wines only to find out later that they were. As Jim would say, “So, there you have it”.

Blake,

And to me, that’s the ‘beauty’ of whole cluster - when it integrates, you don’t necessarily know it’s there, but it seems to add ‘something’ that makes the wine ‘more’ than it would be without it . . .

Cheers.

Agreed. Good point Larry. I will pay much more attention to this in the future.

Very interesting discussion. For the winemakers who do some or all whole-cluster inclusion, how do you deal with vintage variation? My understanding is that stems don’t ripen at the same rate as grapes so there is potential for significant flavor/structure profile variation from year to year. Are there cases where the season changes your choices? Thanks!

Probably several thoughts here. Mine are that I don’t worry about it terribly much at this point. Total lignification is not a thing. There are always green elements to stems. Certainly if Jeremy Seysses was doing 85% stem inclusion in 2011 he wasn’t worried about the negative impact. I was there and Simon Bize (no destemmer) during 2011 harvest so I saw and tasted stuff from people with great experience. I think it is your own comfort with the process. I have backed off when I have seen stalkiness (big stems relative to number of berries), compromised stems (rot/mildew/other), electric green stems (not very common but some places have them), super-young vine fruit (don’t think it handles it well or is worth the effort), certain clones (Mariafeld has weird stems). That being said we have not had a cool vintage since 2011 and we were not doing as much stem inclusion back then so not really a case study to look back at.