Fake wine that tastes the same as the real stuff

[Robert.A.Jr]

@Yao C

This is analogous to our ability to view famous paintings from centuries ago on arbitrarily high resolution screens: technically indistinguishable, and entirely missing the point

Exactly.

Authenticity or nothing.

I find it sad.

[Brian_Tuite]

The article reads like an infomercial. Hard to get behind from the get go because you’re waiting for the hard sell at the end.

[K_John_Joseph]

@Robert.A.Jr.

@Yao C

This is analogous to our ability to view famous paintings from centuries ago on arbitrarily high resolution screens: technically indistinguishable, and entirely missing the point

Exactly.

Authenticity or nothing.

I find it sad.

So this is that. I agree. The company in the article is making impersonations of better wines. It’s like buying a knock off purse. Even a decent knock off. It’s a simulation of the original. But if we’re performing lab analyses on a wine and can successfully identify molecules in the parts per trillion (different tech than this article is discussing), and can recreate on a molecular level the same combination of molecules, what you’d be looking at is not a picture of the original. You’d be looking at an absolutely 100% accurate recreation of the original on a molecular basis. It ceases to be analogous to the painting example proposed by Yao.

It’s great to say “authentic or nothing” but if the wine has the identical molecular construction, it is authentic. Well, with the exception that you can preclude flaws that “authentic” bottles might have. But it didn’t come from grapes from Chave’s parcel in Hermitage! But it is identical. It is the equivalent of a true clone. A genetic twin. And with the original IP owned by the producer, it could even be a “certified print” if that makes you feel better.

[larry_schaffer]

I finally read the article this morning. Here’s the funny thing - this is being done again and again by ‘wineries’ around the world, but without the ‘in depth analysis’ that these guys do.

There are custom crush facilities and larger wine production facilities that specialize in ‘private label’ wines - and much of the time, these wines are aimed at ‘knocking off’ a higher priced wine but retaining much of what that wine offers.

In our neck of the woods, both Terravant and Central Coast Wine Services offer all kinds of private label possibilities - and they will assist in the ‘blending’ to come up with exactly what you’re looking for. Both of these companies have hundreds of their own bulk wine lots to use, but there are bulk wine ‘brokers’ who have hundreds more lots available to sample.

Here’s the thing, though - ‘chemicals’ alone do not make a wine. Yep, you can do what Enologix did back in the 90s and 2000s (not sure if many are continuing to use them) and analyze a wine for color, tannin characteristics, total phenolics, acidity, etc and compare that to a databases of ‘best scoring’ wines to make sure that your wine had the ‘mouthfeel’ or ‘structure’ of a wine you were trying to mimic.

But there is no way to truly capture all of the flavors, aromas and textures that make up a specific wine. You can ‘match’ many of these things of a wine at one particular point in their lives, but then they will change as the wine ages - do these ‘knock off’ wines change in the same manner?

I truly have no problem with what they are doing - it reminds me of the ‘private label’ hair products that discount drug stores used to sell. ‘Just as good as the original’ but at a fraction of the cost. Did they smell just like the original? In most cases, they were pretty close. Did they ‘work’ the same? In some cases, yes, and in others, no.

Cheers.

[Scott_G_r_u_n_e_r]

Walker also knew that most wine gets a boost from additives such as Mega Purple (for color), oak extract (for tannins and flavoring), and similar chemistry-set concoctions.

Most? I really hope not. Depressing thought.

[ToddFrench]

@Scott G r u n e r

Walker also knew that most wine gets a boost from additives such as Mega Purple (for color), oak extract (for tannins and flavoring), and similar chemistry-set concoctions.

Most? I really hope not. Depressing thought.

His last name is Walker - his expertise is set in stone. Do not disagree. #faith

[Ryan_M]

@Anton D

I am unapologetically in favor of this.

I am looking forward to telling the home replicator, “Latour '83, at 54 degrees one hour decant.”

Later, some “Tea, Earl Grey, hot.”

Perhaps some Doe Mane “Romantic Country” Burgundy in my future?

Jean Luc Picard was raised in Burgundy and replicator wines threw his palate off so badly that he was one year off in guessing a vintage blind, so there.

That’s a pretty nice DRC pun!

[Scott_E1]

@larry schaffer

I finally read the article this morning. Here’s the funny thing - this is being done again and again by ‘wineries’ around the world, but without the ‘in depth analysis’ that these guys do.

There are custom crush facilities and larger wine production facilities that specialize in ‘private label’ wines - and much of the time, these wines are aimed at ‘knocking off’ a higher priced wine but retaining much of what that wine offers.

In our neck of the woods, both Terravant and Central Coast Wine Services offer all kinds of private label possibilities - and they will assist in the ‘blending’ to come up with exactly what you’re looking for. Both of these companies have hundreds of their own bulk wine lots to use, but there are bulk wine ‘brokers’ who have hundreds more lots available to sample.

Here’s the thing, though - ‘chemicals’ alone do not make a wine. Yep, you can do what Enologix did back in the 90s and 2000s (not sure if many are continuing to use them) and analyze a wine for color, tannin characteristics, total phenolics, acidity, etc and compare that to a databases of ‘best scoring’ wines to make sure that your wine had the ‘mouthfeel’ or ‘structure’ of a wine you were trying to mimic.

But there is no way to truly capture all of the flavors, aromas and textures that make up a specific wine. You can ‘match’ many of these things of a wine at one particular point in their lives, but then they will change as the wine ages - do these ‘knock off’ wines change in the same manner?

I truly have no problem with what they are doing - it reminds me of the ‘private label’ hair products that discount drug stores used to sell. ‘Just as good as the original’ but at a fraction of the cost. Did they smell just like the original? In most cases, they were pretty close. Did they ‘work’ the same? In some cases, yes, and in others, no.

Cheers.

I agree - the chemical “blueprint” doesn’t seem to do them any good whatsoever. They end up tweaking some bulk juice with additives - they can’t recreate a wine from scratch. Cheers!

[Mattstolz]

@K John Joseph

@Robert.A.Jr.

@Yao C

This is analogous to our ability to view famous paintings from centuries ago on arbitrarily high resolution screens: technically indistinguishable, and entirely missing the point

Exactly.

Authenticity or nothing.

I find it sad.

So this is that. I agree. The company in the article is making impersonations of better wines. It’s like buying a knock off purse. Even a decent knock off. It’s a simulation of the original. But if we’re performing lab analyses on a wine and can successfully identify molecules in the parts per trillion (different tech than this article is discussing), and can recreate on a molecular level the same combination of molecules, what you’d be looking at is not a picture of the original. You’d be looking at an absolutely 100% accurate recreation of the original on a molecular basis. It ceases to be analogous to the painting example proposed by Yao.

It’s great to say “authentic or nothing” but if the wine has the identical molecular construction, it is authentic. Well, with the exception that you can preclude flaws that “authentic” bottles might have. But it didn’t come from grapes from Chave’s parcel in Hermitage! But it is identical. It is the equivalent of a true clone. A genetic twin. And with the original IP owned by the producer, it could even be a “certified print” if that makes you feel better.

theres a difference even with the same molecular makeup. it might not be an analytical difference (although I would guess its almost impossible to replicate EVERY SINGLE molecule in any bottle of wine), but that doesnt mean its the same. the comparison to art is a good one. i can get incredible prints of masterpieces. they can be painted by someone who uses almost the same brush strokes as Da Vinci. that doesn’t make it a da Vinci. theres a spirit to something being authentic, and crafted, that even a perfect replica misses. it might not even be discernible. but just like i have very little interest in drinking a wine that gets its color from Mega Purple, i have very little interest in a wine thats constructed in a lab. its not that i think it would taste bad. its that I want a wine to get its personality from the land and the grower, not from an additive. it completely misses the point to drinking wine for me. just like bulk wine does.

[ToddFrench]

But this is recreated in labs! SCIENCE!!!

[Anton_D]

@Todd F r e n c h

But this is recreated in labs! SCIENCE!!!

White coats, lab glasses, green gloves, Knights Templar emblem on the pocket, - you just can’t argue with that.

[Marcu_Stanley]

It seems like these guys are just blenders who wear lab coats for extra pizzazz.

Does anybody really understand anything about wine at the molecular level anyway? No one can even give a clear explanation of how exactly aging affects wine. People are still arguing about whether aerating a wine improves its flavor. Etc.

[David_Glasser]

Indulging the fantasy that a wine could be replicated molecule for molecule (not the subject of the story in the OP), how much of the enjoyment is based on the taste and smell organoleptic experience and how much is based on the authenticity and respect for the craft?

Wouldn’t figuring out a shortcut to an exact replica of a perfectly aged 1900 Margaux be worthy of respect, albeit of a different set of skills? Or is the invasion of science and technology into a traditional craft just too dissonant?

For me, the answer is somewhere in the middle. I’d love to drink that perfect replica of 1900 Margaux. But there would be a dimension missing.

[Mattstolz]

@David Glasser

Indulging the fantasy that a wine could be replicated molecule for molecule (not the subject of the story in the OP), how much of the enjoyment is based on the taste and smell organoleptic experience and how much is based on the authenticity and respect for the craft?

Wouldn’t figuring out a shortcut to an exact replica of a perfectly aged 1900 Margaux be worthy of respect, albeit of a different set of skills? Or is the invasion of science and technology into a traditional craft just too dissonant?

For me, the answer is somewhere in the middle. I’d love to drink that perfect replica of 1900 Margaux. But there would be a dimension missing.

I think I would always question it though. how perfectly can you really ever replicate something like that? I’d always wonder if I really got the full experience, or something that may be sublime, but slightly less so. To me, part of what would make a 1900 Margaux such an experience is exactly the thing you cant replicate in a lab, which is the fact that its a time capsule to 1900. same with a 1945 DRC. I’d be interested to drink a replica, but the fact that it wasn’t actually bottled from the last pre-phyloxerra vines bottled the year WWII ended means it loses a great deal of why the wine is important.

[David_Glasser]

Same here Matt. Even if I knew that it somehow was magically identical, the loss of context would take something from the experience. And I’d feel a twinge of guilt about cheating. Not enough to turn down the opportunity, though.

[K_John_Joseph]

@David Glasser

Indulging the fantasy that a wine could be replicated molecule for molecule (not the subject of the story in the OP), how much of the enjoyment is based on the taste and smell organoleptic experience and how much is based on the authenticity and respect for the craft?

Wouldn’t figuring out a shortcut to an exact replica of a perfectly aged 1900 Margaux be worthy of respect, albeit of a different set of skills? Or is the invasion of science and technology into a traditional craft just too dissonant?

For me, the answer is somewhere in the middle. I’d love to drink that perfect replica of 1900 Margaux. But there would be a dimension missing.

For me, the missing dimension would be certainty. I’ve had enough wines totally blind to know whether I like or dislike bottles without having any clue who made them or even what the hell they are or how much they cost. So to some degree, I can get jacked up about a wine with no clue as to anything more than what’s in my glass. To some degree, drinking the fabrication would require intellectual discipline. Push out the doubt that it’s not actually identical to what it purports to be (and this is on a pure replication, not the OP link) simply try to enjoy it.

[Anton_D]

@David Glasser

Same here Matt. Even if I knew that it somehow was magically identical, the loss of context would take something from the experience. And I’d feel a twinge of guilt about cheating. Not enough to turn down the opportunity, though.

What if shipping the '45 DRC to Maryland to be consumed in German or Austrian made stems is not what the winemaker intended as authentic context?

Is a now $100K bottle of wine bought and consumed by modern oligarchs ‘keeping it real?’

Will never taste the original in its original context, so no guilt or irony here if they replicate it for 16 dollars.

[K_John_Joseph]

@Anton D

@David Glasser

Same here Matt. Even if I knew that it somehow was magically identical, the loss of context would take something from the experience. And I’d feel a twinge of guilt about cheating. Not enough to turn down the opportunity, though.

What if the shipping the '45 DRC to Maryland to be consumed in German or Austrian made stems is not what the winemaker intended as authentic context?

Is a now $100K bottle of wine bought and consumed by modern oligarchs ‘keeping it real?’

Will never taste the original in its original context, so no guilt or irony here if they replicate it for 16 dollars.

So long as it is indistinguishable blind, I’ll even pay $20.

[Anton_D]

@K John Joseph

@Anton D

@David Glasser

Same here Matt. Even if I knew that it somehow was magically identical, the loss of context would take something from the experience. And I’d feel a twinge of guilt about cheating. Not enough to turn down the opportunity, though.

What if the shipping the '45 DRC to Maryland to be consumed in German or Austrian made stems is not what the winemaker intended as authentic context?

Is a now $100K bottle of wine bought and consumed by modern oligarchs ‘keeping it real?’

Will never taste the original in its original context, so no guilt or irony here if they replicate it for 16 dollars.

So long as it is indistinguishable blind, I’ll even pay $20.

[Joe_G_a_l_e_w_s_k_i]

So, you want to chemically recreate the experience of a wine and your choice is… 2015 Far Niente Chardonnay?

I will offer up some alternate suggestions based on what I have tried:

1990 Château Latour
2001 Château Coutet Cuvée Madame
1990 Château Montrose
1996 Harlan Estate
1983 Château Margaux

I am sure there are even better wines to attempt to replicate, but those have stood out for me. You can keep your Far Niente.

Frankly, if you can recreate the wines I’ve listed, I’d love to drink them, and it wouldn’t bother me much to drink a recreation, as long as the price was reasonable.