There are all kinds of things added to wine to guide its “natural” progress or worse, “manufacture” it to a taste profile. Back sweetening, hydrating, acidifying are not shocking terms to a winemaker.
Being open about it would be a breach of trust, while keeping quiet is fine. Got it! Yes, that’s how the world works. We’ve already seen it with Ridge disclosures of their occasional minor adjustments, with various Chicken Littles starting threads. No good deed goes unpunished.
It’s a wild assumption that you can recognize it when you taste it. That serves to reinforce a conceptualization, which may be false. There’s going to be a lot of crap on grocery store shelves. Their main job is to be shelf stable. Sweetness is there because it sells. There are plenty of ways to achieve sweetness. Grocery store plonk is going to use a lot of central valley grapes, which aren’t only cheap, but ripe. If it’s not very good, it’s probably just a bunch of stuff thrown together, which includes big, ripe, etc. grapes, then maybe a little unfermented juice added post-ferment, along with preservatives to prevent anything happening in the bottle.
The fact some high-end Napa producers sometimes use concentrates belies the claim that they necessarily make a wine taste cheap. They add them to make a wine “better”, more true-to-their-house-style, whenever necessary. They do it because it garners higher ratings, more prestige, more sales, a consistent product.
The only time I’ve knowingly had a wine that had Mega Purple in it was from a winemaker proud about what he’d made from some bulk market Pinot Noir lots. Blending and adjusting, making a good Pinot Noir that tasted like Pinot Noir, and anyone on here would think was a good deal at $25, but his client would be selling for $15. Balanced, moderate alcohol, good complexity, no goofy sweetness or anything like that.
It is definitely an American invention. It’s based on the Rubired grape, another American concoction, because it’s a teinturier grape which means its juice is colored, not clear, it’s used for color adjustment and other things.
I guess I’m not clear here. Why is using something Mega Purple “cheating?” I get it, I suppose, if a winery is telling you that the wine is 100% single-vineyard and all of the varieties are on the label, etc. etc. However, if a winery makes an appellation level wine that includes Mega Purple for color or whatever, what’s misleading about that? If someone likes it and it tastes good to them, what’s the problem? Is this entire discussion directed at higher end wines that supposedly use it but extol the virtues of purity and letting the terroir shine through? If so, I guess I can understand.
I would have to stop purchasing Monte Bello or any wines that I knew had mega purple in it. I suspect several wines that I have had of using mega purple and stopped buying them. I will not name them because it is only my suspicion.
You back up what I was trying to say up thread. Winemakers do many things to move a wine forward. It then becomes more of a discussion of style and whether you agree with that or not. Are they shooting for natural, organic, minimalist or manufactured wines. What are we willing to put up with in order to still purchase that wine. A lot of manufactured wine is sold everyday and people could care less because it’s cheap and fits the flavor profile they like.
I think the issue here also has to do with ‘truth in advertising’, and that hits ALL levels of the wine biz. IF a winery claims to make ‘natural’ wines but then adds yeast and has a company come in to remove VA, things that run ‘counter’ to their claims, how would you feel as a consumer?