It was good still =) ![[give_heart.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/d/d901e2193d88b6126aa8b9efc56661d0718d0d2a.gif "heart"){kind=small}
In addition to the others mentioned i.e. Rhys/Alesia, ESJ, I would also add Salinia.
I would say the wines (red and white) from the Yamhill-Carlton district up here in Oregon show a strong minerality. I attribute that to our ancient marine sedimentary soils (willakenzie). It’s in stark contrast to the more volcanic elements of the Dundee Hills, for example.
I think the best chance for “minerality” in North American wines might be getting up into northern Washington State and maybe even southern British Columbia.
I had an Andrew Will Cabernet blend the other day which had a pretty nice tannin structure to it.
And Charles Smith’s “Kung Fu Girl” is about as close to the Mosel as I’ve seen in the USA.
You could try to do this sort of thing at high altitude in California, but my impression is that there you tend to get frost at unpredictable times - which, of course, just ruins everything.
I don’t think you need a cool climate to show minerality. Look at wines from Priorat or Sicily and tell me that you can’t get minerality out of CA’s climate?
I think that the expression of minerality is a combination of terroir that has something to say and winemaking that doesn’t obscure the terroir with too much ripeness, extraction, oak, oxidative handling, etc.
I also think that a lot of people taste a wine with good freshness, good acidity, elegance and balance, and declare it “mineral” because that is the trendy wine term du jour. I drink a lot of great wines from all over the world that are reserved, low in alcohol, not oaky, very elegant, but not necessarily terribly mineral or terroir laden. IE, just because you don’t destroy terroir in winemaking doesn’t mean that you started with great terroir in the first place and your wine has a lot to say.
As far as some of the examples above, I think Peay is a good call, the Scallop Shelf Pinot has struck as quite mineral on numerous occasions.
A little off topic, but I was tasting with a guy from Montelena the other day, and their Chardonnay seemed to me to be quite minerally [by Napa standards], and so I asked him about the altitude of the vineyard, and he said, “Oh, about 20 feet.”
As he explained it to me, Montelena’s secret is that they just don’t do a malolactic fermentation on their Chardonnay - so apparently MF is responsible for killing a lot of [the sensation of] minerality in California wines - or at least that’s what I took away from the conversation.
And don’t even bring up the topic of oak - I tried a chardonnay recently, from a pretty famous California winery, with the owner pouring it for me - which I think just got major points from someone like Laube - and it tasted like rotten butterscotch.
Yuck.
I should also say that I don’t necessarily think that having a winemaking regimen that doesn’t express terroir is inherently bad. Old school Rioja is so oxidatively made and aged in cask for so long that I think a lot of the chance to express terroir is lost to “house style” and many dessert wines are clearly in these categories. But just because a wine doesn’t show a lot of terroir/minerality doesn’t mean that it isn’t terribly interesting or doesn’t make for a very compelling drink. My favorite dessert wines are Madeira and Vin Santo, and I love dry Jerez… not a lot of minerality there.
As someone who is intimately involved in the process of how plants uptake and use ions, can I call bullshit?
Unless of course you are using the descriptor of mineral as a mere label to describe something expressing a characteristic akin to or like, but not because you believe you are detecting actual minerals?
Plants don’t uptake flavors from soil. They uptake nutrients and surprisingly and counterintuitively they tend to contain higher levels of nutrients of which there is a scarcity in their environment, and less of the ones that are abundant because of various mechanisms.
I have learned this first hand in the process of understanding the uptake and storage of potassium because of it’s effect on wine quality and stability.
I am not sure what you are describing when you describe a mineral aroma? Is it a vegetal character? Is it a sulfide or Sulfur dioxide?
What are you describing when you describe a mineral FLAVOR? Are you describing a flavor, or the tactile/physical/mechanical impression af acid and tannin on mucosal tissue in you mouth?
What are you saying?
Is there just a comfort zone of ambiguiety that we can simply unleash descriptors into without fear of actually having to describe something accurately, (because there is a disfunctional tradition not tied to reality but to metaphor that has existed for generations?)
What are you trying to say? [d_sunny.gif]
2001 JJ Prum Wehlener Sonnenuhr Spatlese = “minerally”.
Generic, buttery, over-oaked, $14.99 grocery store chardonnay = “not minerally”.
Who knows - maybe it’s just the oak & the malo.
Nathan, I’m not sure that malo is a real culprit… Burgundy (red and white), goes through malo, as do pretty much all other wines that show terroir to me with the exceptions of Champagne and German wines. And if malo does obscure terroir, it wouldn’t be a black or white situation, just as oak, ripeness, oxidation, stems, etc are not.
Sure!
What are you trying to say? [d_sunny.gif]
No one will ever convince you that terroir and minerality exist. But I also don’t expect prices to tumble for Montrachet, Le Mesnil, Musigny, Clos des Ducs, Ausone, etc. Even if the vines aren’t taking up minerals from the soil, and if no adequate scientific explanation can be given of “minerality,” a lot of people seem happy to agree on what are a lot of the best vineyard sites in the world.
Minerality is one of those odd descriptors in that what you’re tasting is not really minerals, as Peter notes. From what I’ve gathered after taking a few classes on sensory analysis of wine at Davis and elsewhere, it doesn’t seem like anyone has a real handle on what “minerality” is, although there’s a general consensus that it exists. Best guesses I’ve heard is that might be related to acidity and possibly to some sulfur compounds, but no one knows for sure.
I’ve noticed a nice streak of minerality in the last couple of vintages from Cayuse. A little more iron in the Frog and certainly some stone and crushed rock in a couple of the syrahs as well as the Widowmaker and Flying Pig.
Hi, I’m Jacki, and I am a terroirist. ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
Peter, I live less than 1/2 a mile from Ken Wright and I have the great pleasure of learning from him. Who can come away unscathed from that kind of association? 
Honestly, I don’t know where the “minerality” comes from, whether from actual minerals or from the perception of minerals. But I can say absolutely that in my (limited) experience, the “minerality” I experience in the wines from my vineyard, and those of my neighbors, is in strong contrast to the flavors of the Dundee Hills as a close example. Is it because our soils are so course grained and well drained, causing deeper rooting of the vines and a different level of nutrient uptake, in comparison to the more volcanic/clay soils of our neighboring AVA?
That said, in addition to believing in terroir, I also believe in and practice biodynamics, so you can write me off as a lost cause from the start. [taunt.gif]
Cheers.
I do get it in some wines on very few occasions in CA. Mostly it reflects addtions of Tartaric Acid. Sometimes done appropriately sometimes done not so appropriately…
Terroir is real.
It’s the reason that distinguishes growing conditions, fruit quality and wine quality.
The most dramatic consequence is the effect on vine vigor and how that translates in cluster morphology and characteristics that determine wine quality.
Yes, the old world is full of great examples of terroir from the Mosel Saar Ruhr to the Cote d’Or where site influences ripening and the precursors that are grapes before they are wine.
In fact the Cote d’Or has terroir in it’s name. Riddle me that if you care? Where is the terroir in “Cote d’Or”?
[d_sunny.gif]
Let me guess, he likes big rich buttery Chards? ![[diablo.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/f/f627e009b8e3ab2f6a76c9424f1156a53afc0e3f.gif "diablo"){kind=small}
Well said Josh. I don’t think every Chardonnay made from every vineyard could show mineral content and I think sometimes that term is interjected into descriptions for some when the author may just want to say that its made in a leaner less rich style than many of California wines of the type.
I think there is a big difference between acidulation and minerality.
You know, I was going to add a “Cue Cargasacchi” to my original post but forgot before sending. 
I don’t know what it is and my science nerd back ground doesn’t let me believe it’s about chiseled rocks coming up through the vines but I do think there is some sort of difference often in wines made from grapes grown in very rocky environments. No clue why.
I do know when I smell certain wines it smell like wet rocks or rainy pavement and that is what I associate with minerality in wine.