Ray is making Burgundy, not Pinot Noir. There is no overlap!
One thing that is certainly not mentioned as to why so few leads to good Colour and tannins whilst maintaining what Ray wants perhaps is temperature.
Let us take tea again… Higher temperatures= more extraction.
Lower=less…
Now one thing I didn’t mention, is that Ray doesn’t do cold-soaks or temperature controls, other than perhaps some air-con when strikingly hot (?).
With ferments etc, the temps got a bit steamy at times in the cuverie. Perhaps at higher/natural temperatures that occur in September/with ferments could it be that you don’t need so many pump overs, because at higher temps (let us say 30C as oppose to 20C for example) you will naturally get more extract from the raw ingredients?? And in fact the 2 per day figure stems from an era when there wasn’t ,uch temperature control or cold-soaks and thus the wines were harder and more tannic?? With all the gadgets that Ray eschews, 2 per day is great, but perhaps with a very natural if that is the correct word, set up, Ray is getting it spot on?
Ridicule if you wish, as I will temper this by saying, I really like Ray’s wines and he is a good friend, so I am probably naturally biased.
Roy, definitely hope to see you at vendages 2012… ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Amazing how many people seem to forget this… Or never realized it in the first place. Same for Chardonnay…
Perhaps why some have the obsession about fruit and new oak and extract!
Nt that I think that is good when trying to make Pinot Noir either.
See, that is where we can have a VERY philosophical discussion about what it means to what “not imposing preferences on the grapes” means. For me, doing it all the same is actually imposing the winemaker’s view on the grapes, while making adjustments depending on the vintage and lot is actually being more “hands off” in regards to bringing out the inherent nature of the vintage and source, because I am doing what the grapes are asking me to do. There is no right or wrong answer to the question, it is all preference.
For example, if you ferment 4 tons of grapes in one container, it will heat up more during the fermentation due to its mass as opposed to having 4 one ton bins. They will make completely different wines even if other things are held constant and there is no intervention. Also, if you choose oak tanks to ferment in, it is a very different result than stainless, or concrete. Is a cold soak “natural?” Hoe about new oak? If you look in the excellent book “North American Pinot Noir” by Haeger, you will see all sorts of views on that, all from people who feel they make natural wine.
I know many people who do NOT make wine think that “natural wine” is “letting wine make itself” but this is just a fantasy. Winemaking, by it’s very nature, is an intervention. Natural wine is vinegar. Winemaking is a human endeavor, not a natural one.
Ray essentially (it sounds like) destems, go to tank, lets temperature rise to whatever level it wants. No nutrient additions and natural yeast. But one is still not as natural as one thinks because you still have to…
- choose when to pick (a MAJOR stylistic decision that IS an intervention)
- choose what to ferment in and at what volume
- whether to extend maceration
- add So2 to the barrels
- Choose barrels
- Decide new oak levels
- When to go to bottle
etc
I actually think that imposing a singular winemaking on all grapes that come through the winery regardless of vintage or condition or source is a bigger human imposition than getting in touch with the grapes and source and trying to read what they grapes are telling you to do “now” and leaving the notions at the door. For me, a perfect Cab berry is from the middle of the valley at 27 brix with hedonistic flavors in the 2007 vintage. That will require some winemaking decisions that are quite different from a Coombsville Cab grape at 23 brix in 2011.
Now… in Burgundy, that kind of range and the resulting decisions are probably less in most years. Has anyone ever had to ever water back a Burgundy Red? No. But many have added sugar and we are not talking about poor producers here, but elite ones.
Of course, the fact that you can just pick and let the cards fall where they may is probably why some people think Burgundy is the greatest place for wine on Earth. For me? I prefer Cabernet from Napa and Bordeaux.
I can agree with some of that. But, remember, I am not a ‘winemaker’ and I don’t ‘make’ ‘natural’ wine. Also, I don’t mind intervention, I just prefer to have an Even hand in my input which makes it easier to see the differences in the terroirs. Nothing more, nothing less. I don’t claim to be more or less intrusive than other, but I do guarantee that I am 100% content with my ability to make myself entertained.
Well on that point we can agree! I also think that my choices make it easier to see the differences in terroirs. Nothing more, nothing less.
I applaud Ray for following his heart. Even if most winemakers won’t admit it, we all do what we do because it “feels” right. It’s hard to figure out what’s “best”, because the variables are too numerous, we only get one shot a year, and the base material (grapes) aren’t consistent from vintage to vintage.
So please take these comments/questions as me just talking out loud - trying to think things thru. I don’t know the real answers, or if there are if they lead to making better wine or not. just something to pass a slow Sunday afternoon…
I’m wondering how the overall extraction profile of the wine is altered if you don’t mix up the cap very often. If the issue is contact time between the juice (and emerging alcohol) and the skins, does that mean that the skins that are submerged get over-extracted? Mixing up the must via punchdowns would logically (to me) randomize which skins stay wet and which float free. Would that lead to a more “average” extraction across all the grapes?
Would it be “better” to do more punchdowns and then just press sooner if you’re looking for less extraction? Possibly even press sweet before the alcohol levels peak, which could lead to even more extraction?
I also wonder if very few punchdowns lead to issues with sulfides? It would seem to me that no punchdowns lead to a very reductive environment. Ray - have you seen any reduction issues? Or do you do something (micro-ox?) to potentially counter that issue?
I’d love to someday try Ray’s wines side by side with other producers from the same vineyards. I’d love to see how his ideas translate to the final wine, and how they contrast with other people did.
Best wishes, Ray! Hope 2011 treats you well
Who forgot this? I know the difference. I have talked to Pinot makers who made Burgundy or learned there and I know how those wines are made too. I guarantee you these Burgundy-trained Pinot makers also feel like they are not “making” the wine by doing cold soaks, more than one punchdown a day, or using 70% new oak and are trying to bring out the best of the wine, naturally.
Have you ever made a wine before? Or are you just guessing and declaring it is a better way because it sounds good? I don’t mind debating with another winemaker, but I will get bristly if someone who has never made a wine is telling me I don’t know the difference between Pinot and Burgundy.
Keep doing what you’re doing, Ray.
I find your vision interesting for the same reasons you do, and therefore will always be supportive of your endeavor.
… Oh yeah, the fact that the wines, thus far, have turned-out fabulously doesn’t hurt either! ![[training.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/d/d0f39866e5714408d7091b0bd2d7bb764d7bb973.gif "[training.gif]"){kind=small}
Roy,
What you are looking for is an opinion that will lead to what you perceive to be what the grapes are saying on a scientific level, and as such, there will be greater consistency in quality from vintage to vintage. That is what I believe Ray would call “wine-making” and a “wine-maker” is able to do this.
This is not what I believe Ray is looking for. I don’t think Ray considers himself either “natural” or a “winemaker”. He considers himself a “vinificateur”, and what he is looking for is the inherent differences in the different climats and vintages. In order for this to happen without anything being masked by the human hand (take that with a pinch of salt as Ray has made various decisions along the lines of what he wants to do) is to create a level playing field in order to allow the different terroirs (there I said it) and/or vintage characters to shine.
If you say, Chambertin is robust and extract or decide not to, to gain consistency, and do the opposite with Les Corbeaux the field is no longer level and it is more difficult to see the differences as one has attempted to garner a style/flavour profile by using different techniques. By being consistent across different climats, and vintages regardless means that whatever has been chosen, the differences will be abundantly clear. He could choose to do a million punchdowns, with twenty pump-overs and 600% new oak, with 200 day macerations, and cold soaks. His point is that each climat and vintage will be treated the same, so they all show their individual characters.
Ray’s belief is that he thinks that they will show these aspects with as little intervention on his part as possible, so no new oak, only two punchdowns, etc etc. Natural ferments, etc etc. If that means that the wines only age three years and die, so be it (Ray was trying to display terroir, and not ageability), if that means they age a long time but don’t develop any more flavour, so be it… His ideal and what excites him is different. I find his wines exciting.
Ray, excuse me if I have put words in the horses mouth… Feel free to chastise as you see fit.
Hey Brian!
great to hear from you. Excellent thoughts. I can’t say myself what yields increased extraction or less. The conical shape to the tanks increases the variables, as does the lot size. Great point on the randomization of berries that are fully submerged. That sounds about right to me. Some are getting submerged/extracted at a higher rate, I’d imagine. More punchdowns with a shorter time in tank changes things, for sure. In which way, I can’t say for sure, either.
Reduction was an issue on the only wine I had whole cluster on. It worked itself out, but it was the only time I had issues that were clearly punchdown based. That said, my wines are typically in a more reductive state, but there are many reasons behind this including lack of racking, etc. I’m fine with this. I’m not exactly shooting for early drinking.
As many reading this thread should know from my repeated responses, I am quite inexperienced, and I take pride in this. It is great knowing there is a lot more to learn about something you have dedicated your life to. Difficult to explain, but I feel it everyday. Having discussions like this are great for getting information out as well as sharing ideas with each other. I wouldn’t want someone to shy away from this out of thinking I’d be put off by it. I welcome the exchange, we’re all just wine geeks here anyhow.
Brian, I wish you best for 2011 as well!
Cheers
Ray
Then again, you might NOT be leaving something on the table and instead the tradeoff you are making is paying off in spades in other ways, like nuance.
I would say that destemming would be considered VERY un-natural by some makers of Pinot-based wines. So would new oak. Then you have some other winemakers who say they think 200% new oak is best.
I think it is VERY important that you stay an amateur and not start freaking out that you are going to hear other options from people like me. But you say that you “might” gain X at the “possible” cost of Z. Then again, maybe not! I am just saying that it would be worth trying, since those who do 2 pumpovers per day (most of them) have made some amazing wines. Maybe your sweet spot is a little more, not less. Don’t get too stuck in an idea of “this works” until you have tried a few other things, first.
I have fermented in bin and stainless, at 78F, 85F and all he way up to 100F. New oak, used oak. Even 58 months in new oak. Natural yeast and cultured yeast. No cold soak and 7 days cold soak, 30 days extended maceration and going to press at 5 brix. Mountain fruit, Coombsville fruit, Pritchard Hill fruit and alluvial fan from Rutherford. I’ve tried it all to see what I think is “bringing out the best of each grape” as “naturally” as possible. Not to mention watching other top winemakers have tried. I would love to see what you think of trying a couple things, nothing crazy like me, just somethings other great Burgundians have tried, like more punchdowns. Don’t shut yourself off. But at the same time, don’t think that the other way is better. Try and see for yourself.
Roy,
That comment wasn’t aimed at you personally, just a little Burgophile reply to a good friend of mine who knows a lot more about Burgundy that most winemakers in Burgundy.
P.s. If you hadn’t noticed, I am the author of that piece you mentioned at the beginning, and I spent a lot of time both prior to that and during talking to Ray about what he wants and helping him in 2011 to achieve it. If it wasn’t for my wife looking after my ill dog and missing my original train, I would also have done some punchdowns myself…
I intend to next year, when I plan to work the whole vintage with Ray, and also join him at various important stages of the wines evolution. I might not own a vineyard and spend everyday with the grapes, but that doesn’t mean that one can discourage opinion and debate. By assuming that because I am not a professional “winemaker” that I don’t know how things work and that I am not worth talking to, you are simply going to alienate people. Wine is about interaction and not dogmatism. Life is a journey, we can learn from various different people, even if their opinions and professions are different.
Like I have said elsewhere. They didn’t invent the wheel by reading books, and a professional inventor probably didn’t do it alone either.
Jono - just so you know, that’s not a unique approach. We do the same thing, with the caveat that we’re not robots. For example, if there’s an issue such as overly green seeds we may press a little earlier than other lots. But basically the same process is used on all our fruit. Our goal is that while the wines will stylistically be Loring wines, the differences between the single vineyard wines will be due to terroir, not due to us using different yeast, barrels, etc. While our winery processes differ, Ray and I are on the same page in that respect.
Um, I’d say you hit the nail on the head. It is consistency in the actions taken that make it easier for me personally to understand what the differences in the vineyard are. Having someone specifically ‘turn up’ or emphasize a feature of a particular vineyard are more akin to producing enhancements which is different than what I am doing. It is not better or worse or the same, just a different approach. And like I said, I still happily buy and enjoy the wines of others that see things differently. But, if I am following my personal interests, it only makes sense if I am doing it faithfully. Of course, I have mentioned several times that in 2009, I had these views but I struggled to get everything pinned down how I envisioned them. In 2010, I was able to get nearly exactly where I wanted with respects to my inputs. 2011? Just more refinements of the same plan. Simple.
Brian,
Agreed, the comment was in reply to Roy when he mentioned, extracting less for Musigny but more for Chambertin perhaps… Not what Ray, or clearly you, or many others are after.
The decisions made in levelling that playing field are however open to debate and discussions and will be made by effectively doing what one believes to be best.
J
Thanks for the response, Ray. I find it weird when people get all defensive when asked questions. I always feel if I don’t have a good answer, I probably need to re-think my position! As you say, we’re all constantly learning. Never forget to be open to new ideas. You don’t have to adopt them, but thinking about them can often lead to some insight. But the engineer in me also warns you not to fix something if it isn’t broken. There are an infinite number of ways to get from grapes to great wine, and often the differences don’t make things better, they just make them different ![[drinkers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/82916bed5ad74ac8470bc04089d9758b0c80c9fa.gif "drinkers"){kind=small}
I’m not freaking out in the least. I’m enjoying the comments in the thread. I’d drink the wine that you are describing, but if I did it, it would be someone else’s’ wine. And, I’m not shutting myself off from anything else, I am just firm in my conventions, and happy with my setup thus far. Some years, I may not be, but I need to be stable in order for my goals to be achieved, which one is focused on being able to see a span of vintages with my input being the same (or VERY close to each other), the difference between the bottles being the vineyard and vintage.
Anyhow, thank you again for all of the discussion, guys.
This actually makes my point, even though some will think it does not. I am just giving up on trying to make it.
As per following the same routine, most people find a protocol and then stick to it because it seems to work for them. I am just saying that it is not really possible to say that…
- one kind of accepted protocol is more natural than another.
- That is expresses terroir better than another.
- that it is non-interventionist and lets the grapes express themselves better…
Because winemaking is a subjective decision process in all the ways I laid out before and plenty more.
I do not know of a single winemaker who says “I like to intervene in the process and impose my will on the vineyard and wine.” Everyone tries to stay as natural as they deem possible and make what the vineyard is trying to express, but that can result in not only different winemaking but very different wines!
Other than not keeping the cap directly wet, nothing Ray says scares me, although his lack of punchdowns really is an eye opener and I suspect their might be something even MORE natural in some lots if he gave it a try.
Thanks, Brian. I agree. I’ve seen you, Adam Lee and a few others on here (and elsewhere) being open throughout the years and it seems clear how much of a benefit that it can be. Sure, people may get upset, but if you are open in letting people in and hearing others out, what is there really to lose?
I hope that my tone here hasn’t suggested that I am thinking of switching anything up. I’m only focusing on getting more nagging variables cleaned up. My comments speaking to ‘making a mistake’ is meant to express the reality that I am inexperienced and I don’t personally know others that are doing what I am doing. So, there is no modern track record for this that I can look to and forecast what is in store for our wines. Even if there was, I wouldn’t impose my preferences/forecasts on a discussion. I am aware however that the results of these choices I’ve made won’t be clear for some time.