A Couple of smoky OR 2020s

[Brady_Daniels]

I tasted the Cristom last Fall and had the same experience. I haven’t had too many 2020s, but I can say that the Denison WV Pinot Noir is great, no issues. There are plenty of others I’m sure. I’ve read the Domaine Divio wines are great (in this case, per Paul Gregutt, due to fining the juice, prior to fermentation).

This is a frustrating issue because as we were in élevage, my smoke phenol lab reports looked fine (elevated but not over threshold according to a couple of research papers on the topic) and I had a lot of folks and other wine makers taste the wine blind, and it was fine.

So then you make the decision and the financial commitment to bottle instead of selling it at a loss as bulk wine. But upon racking to tank, a month or so before bottling, you start to notice a bit on the back end. At this point the bottles, labels and corks have been purchased… still it seems fine, so you press ahead. Then, a tad bit more oxidation at bottling (regardless of being careful, sparging bottles, etc., it’s hard to avoid 100%) and the bottled wine has yet more smoke on the back end. At this point, I met with my sales team and we decided to discount the wine to $20retail with a 50% discount for case purchases (a “break even” price point). At this price, many are thrilled and either don’t notice or don’t care too much about the finish : ). I was able to sell all 350 cases in 6 months. Phew.

In terms of the smoke taint compounds, the current state of knowledge and lab analysis (via ETS) includes three types of cresol, and two syringols in addition to two guaiacols, as mentioned above. These are provided both in both their “bound” and “unbound” forms and also, importantly, with a huge caveat that they are only “markers” (I.e., there are other unknown or too-difficult-to-measure (parts per trillion) compounds). That said, my recollection is that the guaiacols are thought to be responsible for “smoky” characteristics and the crésols are the ashy, ashtray, creosote characteristics.

Disclosing and discounting seem to be an appropriate solution. Hopefully 2022 treats you better!

[dougwilder]

I’ve been tasting a lot of Oregon samples recently and tried a handful of 2020 Pinot Noir. They don’t give away much in the nose, or palate entry. They do tend to drop off a cliff in the mid palate. I wish I wasn’t seeing this as it isn’t a wine making problem and I won’t review them.

[ChrisJames]

Brick House has or plans to release a NV blend with some 2020 PN blended with one or two other years. The smoke is noticeable but not unpleasant, and they are disclosing it, so this seems reasonable to me.

I tried a 2020 PN from Willamette Valley Vineyards that was noticeably smoke tainted with the ash tray finish. Nothing disclosed (that I saw) in the tasting notes or offer sheet.

I think one of the Vincent Gamay Noir that I tried is slightly smoke tainted. This one was the most subtle to me, it’s still a good wine (for now anyway), and I’m honestly not 100 percent sure but if I had to bet on it I would say slightly tainted.

Violin Wine out of Eola Amity is making a similar wine - an MV (multi-vintage). I haven’t tasted it, but here is the write up. I don’t see any mention of smoke or why the wine was made in this way.

“The “80/20” will go down as the highest percentage of Eola-Amity Hills (92%) of any previous version, augmented by the fact that all 20% of 2021 wine came from Koosah Vineyard, the highest elevation Pinot noir being grown in the AVA. 2020 Vintage: 11% Koosah, 20% Temperance Hill, 22% Sylvia’s, 6% Justice, 13% Witness Tree, and 8% First Man (Tualatin Hills AVA). By vineyard alone, Koosah represents the biggest portion of the blend. Though it sits at such high elevation, ’21 was a successful year for the young site, and produced a rounded and vibrant texture that was well suited to marry with the highly dense and structured 2020 wines. (It is worth noting our decision to not produce vineyard designate wines from Pinot noir this vintage, using pieces in this blend that would normally stand alone. In particular, the old vines from Temperance Hill, Witness Tree, and Justice Vineyard help extend the depth of tannin and “soulfulness” in this addition to dramatic lengths).

It was my goal to wait as long as possible for bringing the two vintages together in order that the 2021 Koosah had at least three months of barrel aging and natural clarification. While the 2020 Pinots were assembled in tank in early December after 14 months in barrel, the “MV” blend was only made a week before bottling on January 26th, 2020. I have never before planned to blend mature wines with youthful wines, and I suspect we will see some amount of random expression in bottle until the elements have had time to find their collective “voice”. I believe these elements are of the highest quality however, and have not been impeded by the use of fining agents, adjuncts or high pressure filtration, allowing us the opportunity to enjoy a wine made from the same sites, but over two growing seasons instead of one. By utilizing the same techniques that have brought forth our sense of style over the last seven vintages, we hope to have found a purity of regional expression through the lens of Pinot noir for an eight time under the Violin brand.

Barrel spice and raspberry come together in the nose, with savory, floral and “sous bois” underpinnings laying a framework for darker, muddled berry fruits. A well integrated core of acidity produces succulence and juiciness on entry and across the middle, displaying elegant palate balance and edgy, almost chewy tannins that extend the finish. “Compact” is the term I think best fits the texture of this wine, a true reflection of the minimal yields in 2020, resulting in layered intensity, classic weight, and general refinement."

[CalebJoseph]

I’m a big Cristom fan and was up there tasting a few months back with Steve. I’ve tried their 2020 several times now, and I tend to agree, it probably shouldn’t have been made. I’ve tried plenty of 2020’s now and while I certainly want to support wineries that have had an extremely tough go of it the last several years, I won’t be buying any 2020’s at this point. The smoke if not noticeable up front tends to creep in at the back end and linger. Also, those that don’t have noticeable smoke seem to have been manipulated to the point of losing much of their charm and become somewhat nondescript.

[ChrisJames]

We made one from stuff picked before the smoke hit the valley floor. It’s, obviously, unimpacted but I’m sure glad we only had 800 cases of it because trying to explain that to a much larger number of people would have been difficult…

PGC has a lot of groupies. That one sold out fast.

[John_Peacock]

Having tried the 2020 Colene Clemens wines (multiple times, frequently blind, as my wife works there), the Dopp Creek is the only one that I consistently find smokey notes on. Their higher end bottlings (Adriane and Victoria) do not have any discernible notes of smoke or ash.

2020 is definitely a vintage of “try before you buy”, and also drink them sooner than later. We might cellar a few bottles of various 2020s just for “science” and to see what happens in 10 years.

[R_yan_C_omaz_zetto]

I’ve only had a few inexpensive / grocery store brands that friends and family have served. Underwood was terribly smoky and undrinkable. Willamette Valley Vineyards was not as bad, but still unpleasant. Another as well, which I can’t recall the producer. I’ve only had 3 and all of them were affected. I know most wineries simply can’t afford to dump tainted wine, but I have to imagine they are also going to lose customers. The Underwood was truly DNPIM. I’d expect higher quality / more reputable labels to put out better wine, but definitely try before you buy. And on the inexpensive end, just avoid altogether.

[Lou_Recupero]

Had the 2020 Cristom WV back in May, and noticed the smoke immediately. Interestingly enough my wife said she did not seem to think it very prominent at all… This thread seems to show i wasn’t imagining it.

[larry_schaffer]

This is going to be tougher and tougher to watch, me thinks. And to those who have pondered whether ‘respectable’ wineries would ‘knowingly’ release smoke tainted wines - threads like these will just fuel more speculation unfortunately . . .

[Patrick_Taylor]

I recently had a 2020 Ken Wright Willamette Valley. It was undrinkable, not due to the smoke taint but rather the excessive amount of oak (which mostly covered up the smoke taint).

[Will_Hamilton]

Brick House has or plans to release a NV blend with some 2020 PN blended with one or two other years. The smoke is noticeable but not unpleasant, and they are disclosing it, so this seems reasonable to me.

I tried a 2020 PN from Willamette Valley Vineyards that was noticeably smoke tainted with the ash tray finish. Nothing disclosed (that I saw) in the tasting notes or offer sheet.

I think one of the Vincent Gamay Noir that I tried is slightly smoke tainted. This one was the most subtle to me, it’s still a good wine (for now anyway), and I’m honestly not 100 percent sure but if I had to bet on it I would say slightly tainted.

Violin Wine out of Eola Amity is making a similar wine - an MV (multi-vintage). I haven’t tasted it, but here is the write up. I don’t see any mention of smoke or why the wine was made in this way.

“The “80/20” will go down as the highest percentage of Eola-Amity Hills (92%) of any previous version, augmented by the fact that all 20% of 2021 wine came from Koosah Vineyard, the highest elevation Pinot noir being grown in the AVA. 2020 Vintage: 11% Koosah, 20% Temperance Hill, 22% Sylvia’s, 6% Justice, 13% Witness Tree, and 8% First Man (Tualatin Hills AVA). By vineyard alone, Koosah represents the biggest portion of the blend. Though it sits at such high elevation, ’21 was a successful year for the young site, and produced a rounded and vibrant texture that was well suited to marry with the highly dense and structured 2020 wines. (It is worth noting our decision to not produce vineyard designate wines from Pinot noir this vintage, using pieces in this blend that would normally stand alone. In particular, the old vines from Temperance Hill, Witness Tree, and Justice Vineyard help extend the depth of tannin and “soulfulness” in this addition to dramatic lengths).

It was my goal to wait as long as possible for bringing the two vintages together in order that the 2021 Koosah had at least three months of barrel aging and natural clarification. While the 2020 Pinots were assembled in tank in early December after 14 months in barrel, the “MV” blend was only made a week before bottling on January 26th, 2020. I have never before planned to blend mature wines with youthful wines, and I suspect we will see some amount of random expression in bottle until the elements have had time to find their collective “voice”. I believe these elements are of the highest quality however, and have not been impeded by the use of fining agents, adjuncts or high pressure filtration, allowing us the opportunity to enjoy a wine made from the same sites, but over two growing seasons instead of one. By utilizing the same techniques that have brought forth our sense of style over the last seven vintages, we hope to have found a purity of regional expression through the lens of Pinot noir for an eight time under the Violin brand.

Barrel spice and raspberry come together in the nose, with savory, floral and “sous bois” underpinnings laying a framework for darker, muddled berry fruits. A well integrated core of acidity produces succulence and juiciness on entry and across the middle, displaying elegant palate balance and edgy, almost chewy tannins that extend the finish. “Compact” is the term I think best fits the texture of this wine, a true reflection of the minimal yields in 2020, resulting in layered intensity, classic weight, and general refinement."

Thanks for the mention Chris, and this is good dialogue regarding the “smoke tainted” 2020 vintage in the WV. It is true that in my objective tasting notes is is not necessary to mention “smoke flavor”. I focus on site and elevage in describing my wines, and try to make an honest tasting note based around flavor and aroma. I’ve had enough experience with the tone/flavor/feeling of the what the smoke left us that I stopped trying to ignore its presence, but rather speak about the wine as a whole, (in a more objective sense). I believe we have produced a very compelling bottling and delicious wine at the $30 price point. (The 20% from 2021 does not “hide” the smoke, but rather integrates the texture so the finish and mid palate is more fresh and fruit driven. In this way, we still see the reflection of the texture and intensity of 2020, which other than the smoke would be an absolutely incredible vintage, Chardonnay certainly speaks to this as well).

I agree with Jim Anderson, I prefer to make wines from our Valley when smoke is not part of the equation. I don’t care for it, but as an objective character in my “MV” “8020”, my customers are having quite good experiences and I don’t anticipate having problems moving through the 750 cases I produced. That said, I suspect the more astute consumers who follow threads like this would prefer other vintages, myself included. That said, in a few years I will blind Chris James on this 80/20 wine and I know he will be pleasantly surprised by its elegance.

To maintain my approach in being transparent in our production, this is what I wrote to my mailing list in introducing the three cuvees I did bottle, so while you won’t find my admission in “tasting notes”, I make no attempt to hide it from my customer base, and this is certainly true should you come and taste this wine at the winery.

"Our decision was to make the wines carefully (as always!), but not use any mitigation techniques involving additions of oak chips, carbon or other fining agents. We used fewer juice lees in Chardonnay, and tried to press Pinot noir off skins a few days earlier than we might normally. We wanted to stay true to our style and have a chance to better evaluate the “impact” of the smoke during aging of the wines without extra variables to consider.

And we are glad we did. The Chardonnays are racier than their ’19 counterparts, with slightly higher acidity, lower alcohol, and wonderful concentration and salinity. The 2020 Pinots are especially compact, well structured and intense, perfumy wines. The “smoke character” integrates a unique savoriness in the wines, which had a more obvious influence on the texture of Pinot. To counterbalance this feeling, we decided to blend in 20% from the young 2021 vintage rather than try to fine or strip it away, also adding a fresher fruit character in the mix. We believe this has led us to a finished wine that is more true to our style, that allowed our textures to fully evolve and express their gorgeous, intense cores, while reflecting the many wonderful qualities of the sometimes harrowing vintage."

[ChrisJames]

Thanks for the mention Chris, and this is good dialogue regarding the “smoke tainted” 2020 vintage in the WV. It is true that in my objective tasting notes is is not necessary to mention “smoke flavor”. I focus on site and elevage in describing my wines, and try to make an honest tasting note based around flavor and aroma. I’ve had enough experience with the tone/flavor/feeling of the what the smoke left us that I stopped trying to ignore its presence, but rather speak about the wine as a whole, (in a more objective sense). I believe we have produced a very compelling bottling and delicious wine at the $30 price point. (The 20% from 2021 does not “hide” the smoke, but rather integrates the texture so the finish and mid palate is more fresh and fruit driven. In this way, we still see the reflection of the texture and intensity of 2020, which other than the smoke would be an absolutely incredible vintage, Chardonnay certainly speaks to this as well).

I agree with Jim Anderson, I prefer to make wines from our Valley when smoke is not part of the equation. I don’t care for it, but as an objective character in my “MV” “8020”, my customers are having quite good experiences and I don’t anticipate having problems moving through the 750 cases I produced. That said, I suspect the more astute consumers who follow threads like this would prefer other vintages, myself included. That said, in a few years I will blind Chris James on this 80/20 wine and I know he will be pleasantly surprised by its elegance.

To maintain my approach in being transparent in our production, this is what I wrote to my mailing list in introducing the three cuvees I did bottle, so while you won’t find my admission in “tasting notes”, I make no attempt to hide it from my customer base, and this is certainly true should you come and taste this wine at the winery.

"Our decision was to make the wines carefully (as always!), but not use any mitigation techniques involving additions of oak chips, carbon or other fining agents. We used fewer juice lees in Chardonnay, and tried to press Pinot noir off skins a few days earlier than we might normally. We wanted to stay true to our style and have a chance to better evaluate the “impact” of the smoke during aging of the wines without extra variables to consider.

And we are glad we did. The Chardonnays are racier than their ’19 counterparts, with slightly higher acidity, lower alcohol, and wonderful concentration and salinity. The 2020 Pinots are especially compact, well structured and intense, perfumy wines. The “smoke character” integrates a unique savoriness in the wines, which had a more obvious influence on the texture of Pinot. To counterbalance this feeling, we decided to blend in 20% from the young 2021 vintage rather than try to fine or strip it away, also adding a fresher fruit character in the mix. We believe this has led us to a finished wine that is more true to our style, that allowed our textures to fully evolve and express their gorgeous, intense cores, while reflecting the many wonderful qualities of the sometimes harrowing vintage."

Thanks for chiming in Will. I have no doubt that it is a quality and tasty wine, just like all the wines you produce. I only added this as another interesting approach to 2020.

Cheers

[dougwilder]

I’ve had several 2020 Oregon Pinots. None reminded me of 2008 Anderson Valley wines at all, no ashtray notes. That said, I haven’t loved one yet.

I drank one alongside its 2019 counterpart, and they were vastly different, the 2020 being clipped and a little dull. It had gone through carbon filtration, so either that, smoke, or vintage effects caused the difference. I’d bet on the filtration, which I’m sure was necessary, so still the smoke’s fault.

I have a 2020 Cameron Dundee Hills lined up. Perhaps I’ll try it side-by-side with the 19.

There are NO magic bullets when it comes to smoke taint. Some things will take edges off, perhaps only in the short term, maybe also in the long term but likely there is no consistency because, as pointed out above, it’s not a level playing field. Different types of smoke, different intensities, levels and times of exposure, etc. I can absolutely guarantee that someone in Oregon in 2020 or 2021 came up with some radical process that removes smoke taint. It’s been around all over the world for a long time and there’s been untold amounts of money poured into studies and trials and the results are not great when it comes to winemaking in this situation.

I’ve had some decent Chardonnays (not mine!) from 2020 and a couple of other white/pink/orange wines but that’s it. Doesn’t mean good Pinot doesn’t exist but it would have to exist under a particular set of circumstances. We made one from stuff picked before the smoke hit the valley floor. It’s, obviously, unimpacted but I’m sure glad we only had 800 cases of it because trying to explain that to a much larger number of people would have been difficult. We also made one from definitely impacted stuff but with low level affect (both by sensory and the numbers) and I pulled out the BREAK ONLY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY box of winemaking tricks, sleights of hand and funky bunch stuff to create a very nice but clearly $16 of Pinot that might as well have been called Drink It Now rather than Dollar Bills Only.

Hope to never see that situation again but pardon me if I don’t hold my breath.

I concur with some very nice white wines from the 2020 Oregon vintage. The Pinot Noir so far, not so much.

[Robert_M_yers]

I’ve only had a few inexpensive / grocery store brands that friends and family have served. Underwood was terribly smoky and undrinkable. Willamette Valley Vineyards was not as bad, but still unpleasant. Another as well, which I can’t recall the producer. I’ve only had 3 and all of them were affected. I know most wineries simply can’t afford to dump tainted wine, but I have to imagine they are also going to lose customers. The Underwood was truly DNPIM. I’d expect higher quality / more reputable labels to put out better wine, but definitely try before you buy. And on the inexpensive end, just avoid altogether.

Just curious, what was the perception of the taint to the folks that drink the supermarket brands regularly. Did it stick out to those who may not be looking for it necessarily?

[Stan_Y]

Y’all got me to open a bottle of Walter Scott ‘Bois Moi’ just now. Pretty good wine. Definitely a ‘drink me now’ profile with good acid-fruit balance. It has a slight note of char or toast that I associate with either reduction or how the barrels were prepped, could be smoke, but not readily identifiable as such. I am not opposed to buying 2020 whites if this is indicative, and the price is right.

[JBrochu]

Y’all got me to open a bottle of Walter Scott ‘Bois Moi’ just now. Pretty good wine. Definitely a ‘drink me now’ profile with good acid-fruit balance. It has a slight note of char or toast that I associate with either reduction or how the barrels were prepped, could be smoke, but not readily identifiable as such. I am not opposed to buying 2020 whites if this is indicative, and the price is right.

I think many/most whites were not effected by smoke?

[Marcus_Goodfellow]

I agree that “smoke” used as a descriptor can vary widely not just in tainted wines but even in non tainted wines. The problem being the bound fire related molecules, guaiacol, 4-methylguaiacol and several others release over time during wine aging giving that acrid ashy-ashtray note which is far different than a mild slight smoky note often seen in various wines.

Even at those higher perceived levels some consumers may not object, heck, some people don’t mind TCA but that acrid ashtray note is foreign to the bottled wine. 2008 pinot noir in the Anderson Valley is an example of severe smoke taint emerging over time in the bottle.

Tom

Are you sure you know which chemical causes “ashtray”?

From my experience, the ashtray term is more a mouthfeel issue than an aroma. There are a wide range of chemicals produced by wildfire. Each tainted wine likely has a different concentration of a wide range of different components.

The wine I am referring to had the level of apparent taint drop by 75 to 85%. At one point 10 out 10 tasters, smoke would be their first or top descriptor. Now, unprompted, around 1 in 20 mentions it and less than 1 in 5 of those sees it as problematic.

On the other hand, I have seen wines where the taint seems to get worse over time.

My main point is that not all taint is the same. Given the current state of the science, I would shy away from blanket statements presented as fact.

The smoky, ashy, ashtray notes are a complex mixture, I mention the two molecules at elevated levels only as a common reference for “smoke taint” descriptors. Actually, I think we are in agreement. There is no substitute, not GC not GC MS, NMR etc for the human sensory evaluation. I have no doubt that the wine you specify is dropping in taint and even more important is becoming far less obvious to sensory evaluation (tasting). That is key!

I was only referring to the bound molecules releasing over time as in 2008 Anderson Valley pinot noir. Obviously that phenomenon will vary due to a variety of conditions, severity of taint, grape variety, processing, aging etc. The wine you are referring to proves that not all smoke taint is created equal.

Tom

The two molecules that you listed are only referenced as markers for smoke taint, and they have a moderately poor correllation for smoke taint and also occur in new barrels.

There arealso a series of cresols that occur, and a new study from Elizabeth Tomasino in Oregon. She has isolated a series of sulfur based phenols that correllate more significantly to smoke taint, and hopefully with some research methods of treating these thio-phenols will be developed.

[Tom_DeBiase]

Are you sure you know which chemical causes “ashtray”?

From my experience, the ashtray term is more a mouthfeel issue than an aroma. There are a wide range of chemicals produced by wildfire. Each tainted wine likely has a different concentration of a wide range of different components.

The wine I am referring to had the level of apparent taint drop by 75 to 85%. At one point 10 out 10 tasters, smoke would be their first or top descriptor. Now, unprompted, around 1 in 20 mentions it and less than 1 in 5 of those sees it as problematic.

On the other hand, I have seen wines where the taint seems to get worse over time.

My main point is that not all taint is the same. Given the current state of the science, I would shy away from blanket statements presented as fact.

The smoky, ashy, ashtray notes are a complex mixture, I mention the two molecules at elevated levels only as a common reference for “smoke taint” descriptors. Actually, I think we are in agreement. There is no substitute, not GC not GC MS, NMR etc for the human sensory evaluation. I have no doubt that the wine you specify is dropping in taint and even more important is becoming far less obvious to sensory evaluation (tasting). That is key!

I was only referring to the bound molecules releasing over time as in 2008 Anderson Valley pinot noir. Obviously that phenomenon will vary due to a variety of conditions, severity of taint, grape variety, processing, aging etc. The wine you are referring to proves that not all smoke taint is created equal.

Tom

The two molecules that you listed are only referenced as markers for smoke taint, and they have a moderately poor correllation for smoke taint and also occur in new barrels.

There arealso a series of cresols that occur, and a new study from Elizabeth Tomasino in Oregon. She has isolated a series of sulfur based phenols that correllate more significantly to smoke taint, and hopefully with some research meyhods ofthreating these thio-phenols will be developed.

Yeah, I only mentioned those only as they are commonly known. In my prior life our team isolated several of the “ashy-ashtray” notes (chemicals), not in tainted wine but in highly roasted coffee (you can probably guess the client). What we learned back then, 1999-2002 was that the desirable aroma of roasted coffee is extremely volatile, while the strong stale ashtray type notes are powerful sulfurs and stable as a rock.

I’m pretty sure though not certain that some of the smoke tainted molecules are the same as those in highly roasted coffee.

Wishing for the best for you and all WV Owners-Winemakers.

Tom

[R_yan_C_omaz_zetto]

I’ve only had a few inexpensive / grocery store brands that friends and family have served. Underwood was terribly smoky and undrinkable. Willamette Valley Vineyards was not as bad, but still unpleasant. Another as well, which I can’t recall the producer. I’ve only had 3 and all of them were affected. I know most wineries simply can’t afford to dump tainted wine, but I have to imagine they are also going to lose customers. The Underwood was truly DNPIM. I’d expect higher quality / more reputable labels to put out better wine, but definitely try before you buy. And on the inexpensive end, just avoid altogether.

Just curious, what was the perception of the taint to the folks that drink the supermarket brands regularly. Did it stick out to those who may not be looking for it necessarily?

My sister bought the Underwood and was the first to taste it and noticed something was off and she didn’t like it. When I smelled it and checked the vintage, I knew right away. She said she had a previous vintage and liked it in the past, but this one was not good.

The WVV was not quite as overt. My friend that opened it tasted it and didn’t say anything - but I could see him looking at his glass and he seemed kinda confused. Then I smelled it, and the smoke was immediately apparent, but not super offensive, just enough to make you not really want to keep drinking it.

So for both of them, they noticed something wasn’t right without me saying anything first. If I hadn’t been there for the Underwood, I know my sister wouldn’t have drank it and wouldn’t purchase it again. For the other one, my friend may have drank it, but would not have bought it again.

[Joseph_Zamrin]

I’ll just note that a 2020 Drouhin Cloudline PN showed no obvious problem.