American Oak........couple of questions

[Victor_de_la_Serna]

Fascinating thread, this. DLynn Proctor(Italy?)'s contributions make my list of the wackiest pronouncements on Spanish wine - a subject I know a little about - I’ve ever read on the internet.

I disagree with John Gilman’s - and María José López de Heredia’s - take on the origins of American oak use in Rioja. It seems pretty wacko IMHO to say that they feared oak might have anything to do with phylloxera. Wine historians in Spain paint a different picture. When Rioja began making ‘serious’, cask-aged wine around 1860, oak barrels were well-known in Spain because they had been used extensively in Jerez for at least 150 years. There were many coopers in Spain, and they had been working forever with American oak because there weren’t many native oak trees in arid Spain and Spanish trade in the 18th century had been intense with the Americas, including the U.S. after 1776 (Spain was a strong backer of the American Revolution, although this backing is less often reported than France’s backing in the history books.) So the natural thing in 1860 was to resort to Spanish cooperages and American oak. A second, powerful element played from the start: price. You could buy two American oak barrels for the price of one French oak barrel in 1860 - just as you can today.

That said, new American oak is almost exclusively used by Rioja wineries still using it for younger, less expensive wine that’s not aged for more than a year in it. As John mentions, they will use 5% to 10% (at most!) for long-aged Reservas and Gran Reservas. One of the reasons is that those incomprehensible Rioja regulations ban larger-sized barrels such as demi-muids: 225-liter Bordeaux-shaped barriques are compulsory. This makes the coconut-heavy impact of new American oak intolerable when aging wine for 24 months or longer.

[Nola_Palomar]

@DLynn Proctor(Italy?)

C. Tempranillo, and Garnacha have no personality on their own. Skins are too thin and need a little “Wholey Oak” to impart some character.

DLynn, I am not sure what you’re smokin or where you have come up with your so called expert advise, but I respectfully disagree. Heck, forget the respectful part.

@Victor de la Serna

Fascinating thread, this. DLynn Proctor(Italy?)'s contributions make my list of the wackiest pronouncements on Spanish wine - a subject I know a little about - I’ve ever read on the internet.

I disagree with John Gilman’s - and María José López de Heredia’s - take on the origins of American oak use in Rioja. It seems pretty wacko IMHO to say that they feared oak might have anything to do with phylloxera. Wine historians in Spain paint a different picture. When Rioja began making ‘serious’, cask-aged wine around 1860, oak barrels were well-known in Spain because they had been used extensively in Jerez for at least 150 years. There were many coopers in Spain, and they had been working forever with American oak because there weren’t many native oak trees in arid Spain and Spanish trade in the 18th century had been intense with the Americas, including the U.S. after 1776 (Spain was a strong backer of the American Revolution, although this backing is less often reported than France’s backing in the history books.) So the natural thing in 1860 was to resort to Spanish cooperages and American oak. A second, powerful element played from the start: price. You could buy two American oak barrels for the price of one French oak barrel in 1860 - just as you can today.

That said, new American oak is almost exclusively used by Rioja wineries still using it for younger, less expensive wine that’s not aged for more than a year in it. As John mentions, they will use 5% to 10% (at most!) for long-aged Reservas and Gran Reservas. One of the reasons is that those incomprehensible Rioja regulations ban larger-sized barrels such as demi-muids: 225-liter Bordeaux-shaped barriques are compulsory. This makes the coconut-heavy impact of new American oak intolerable when aging wine for 24 months or longer.

Fantastic post Victor, thank you. I mentioned the price difference in the other “Oak” thread on the board. As a producer, that is the primary “reason” we use American oak.

[Robert.Fleming]

@DLynn Proctor(Italy?)

Garnacha [has] no personality on [its] own. Skins are too thin and [it] need a little “Wholey Oak” to impart some character.

Fightin’ words to this enthusiastic and unapologetic Grenache slut.

In my experience, the very best Grenache-based wines see zero new oak and little or no old.

[M_Smith]

the very best Grenache-based wines see zero new oak and little or no old.

Yet might contain “a spoonful of Fonsalette Syrah in the red, but so what?”

Rhone Renaissance by Remington Norman (p. 120, re: Rayas)

Red Chateauneuf du Pape Chateau Rayas - 100% Grenache, > at least 98%> .
Red Chateauneuf du Pape Chateau Pignan - 100% Grenache, > at least 98%> .

Chateau Rayas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Brent_C_l_a_y_t_o_n]

I am so glad I never wasted my time or money on professional wine training.

When I was 20, though, you could definitely say I knew just enough to sound dangerously stupid.

[DLynnProctor]

Yeah guys, my posts were totally uncalled for and I was just having a bad day and decided to fly off the rail! Totally not cool. I just kept going to keep up a stir. Again not cool on my end. Wine is too cool to share and chat about and enjoy for all its history. I’ll be sending Josh Beckett a message to say sorry and cheers! Look forward to more posts with you guys on Berserkers, because we all have great things to say and great ideas. Cheers guys and gals. DLynn