Quick question - what is it about the Arcadian syrahs that leads you to believe that they will age in the manner you think they will?!?!? Just curious . . .
Cheers!
Todd, I am no wine-maker but I’ve read a bit and I might be able to lay it out clearly.
The really short-term drinkers, think in terms of White Zin – are largely composed of free run juice, probably from really ripe grapes. You get nice fat sugary juice which leads to simple uncomplicated wine. The grape can be divided into “zones” and free run juice comes from the layer of fruit far enough from skin and seed not to have any tannin to speak of.
There are some very specific things you have to do if you want to have enough tannins for a wine to last for decades. To get that extra protection you have to get into the other zones of the grape, the flesh right around the seeds and skin. Also the stems will help (“whole bunch” fermentation, and letting the grapes rest on the lees etc.). This extracts a lot of color if the grapes are red, and the tannins come along too.
Doing these things will produce a wine which is probably not very much fun to drink at one year old, but one which will be in really good condition at 15 years.
I heard the guy from Arcadian on Grape Radio talking about how they did some barefoot crushing, and the advantage of that was that you can’t break grape seeds with your bare feet. You get the flesh of the grape right down to that part in between the seeds, but you don’t get the bitter flavor of the seed’s interior. Makes sense to me.
F
(relatively) low alcohol levels, intense fruit with additional complexities, wonderful acidity, and (what appears to me, at least, to be) good structure.
Assuming that is the goal for many of us, what is Joe doing to achieve this style? Larry?
This brings up another set of questions about cropping and it’s affect on wine style/ quality- but that’s a whole new thread. ![[wink.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/04707e6a7bbb03e0153e349d8a9270d30e1e9525.gif "wink"){kind=small}
John,
FWIW, I think your ‘06 Kimberly’s “One Barrel” is in the same room as Joe’s Purisima. The Kimberly’s seemed more open than the Purisima (I’m thinking of the ‘05 Purisima now), but I thought there were many stylistic similarities between the two. Whatever you did with the One Barrel, please keep doing it!!
as a refresher, here’s what I thought of your Kimberly’s One Barrel (note, I did not get the bacon or bacon fat that everybody else that tastes this wine seems to get … i did note “campfire smokiness,” however)
– popped and poured –
– tasted non-blind over 2 hours –
NOSE: primary aromas of campfire smokiness and spicy meat rub … capicola; blackberry and a hints of anise and mollasses in the background; incredibly deep florals – petals that are maybe a day or two from going bad; a bit alcoholic.
BODY: dark magenta color of medium-deep depth; medium bodied; some fine particulate matter
TASTE: smoky campfire; great balance … tannins build from the finish, good acidity and well-embedded minerality; plum; full palate; tannins do assert on the finish (40 sec.); almost seems French, but without the funk … earth-dominated flavor profile; not hot; acid and tannin hold strong with time in the glass; seems pleasantly open for drinking right now.
B: 50, 5, 12, 18, 8 = 93
Lowers the acidity, and to excess can result in unbalancingly high alcohol thereby reducing ageworthiness.
Cold soaking to increase extraction? How does that affect aging potential?
Not sure about that one, but if done to excess, would unbalance the wine.
New oak? They were using that years ago.
In the Northern Rhône, other than Guigal, no one I can think of was using new oak before the late 1980s/early 1990s. Guigal’s use of new oak is like no one else’s, and we know the older wines he made with it do age. For others, would get more exposure to oxygen in the wine.
Other changes include vatting time, various techniques to reduce reduction, no longer using stems (for most producers, Clape and Graillot being two notable exceptions), earlier bottling, etc. But I’m not qualified to give technical explanations as to how those affect ageworthiness.
Brian, that was just one barrel out of 17 from our Kimberly’s Vineyard in front of the winery. I treated all the barrels from that vineyard with the same cropping regime, barrel program and fermentation techniques. The one barrel was just from a particularly rocky section at the bottom that only yielded 1000 lbs of fruit(one barrel). I think the regular Kimberly’s(other 16 barrels) has similar structure and meaty characteristics, yet were co-fermented with Vio, which certainly changes the wine. The one barrel section did ripen earlier, which has its effects.
do you think this may be the reason for the nice acidity that wine has? I see I also noted “medium body” … I normally characterize the Syrahs I drink as being “medium-full” or “full” bodied. Do you think the earlier ripening had something to do with this unusual elegance?
Have you ever had a bottle of the “regular” Kimberly’s? It has a bit higher acidity than the one barrel (no acid or water were added to either of them-just FYI), yet ripened 3 days to a week later than the “one barrel” block. The 8% Viognier in it gave it a bit more lift/acid on the finish- side by side with the 100% lots.
Do you think higher acidity gives a “lighter” feel to wine?
No, I haven’t, but the higher acidity with the Viognier co-ferment doesn’t surprise me. I actually just got done perusing your website a couple minutes ago, as our ongoing conversation piqued my curiosity. I was pleasantly surprised at the very reasonable prices you are charging for your entire lineup. and I love that photo of your kid (I’m assuming) with the tiny frog on knuckle - sooo cute! If my wine storage wasn’t literally overflowing into rolling coolers in the middle of my living room right now, you’d have an order from me for a selection of your offerings. You’re on my short list, for sure, as the one barrel impressed me more than most wines do!
EDIT: i forgot to answer your parting question: “yes,” now that you make me think about it, I do believe that, everything else remaining the same, higher acidity generally (but not always) does make a wine seem lighter bodied to me.
Longer hang times don’t necassarily= riper fruit. Crop levels, canopy health/vigor, weather, and climate play into that, but all things equal longer hang time can decrease acidity and soften tannins, which can result in “aging weakness”.
Cold soaking(grape maceration in the absence of alc.) doesn’t change the acidity or many of the other structural components that help a wine to live a long, healthy life.
I would also think that many of the traditional wines were aged in old (in some cases very large) barrels with tartrate crystals a half inch thick, lining the inside of the barrels. They probably had less oxygen contact, and evaporation, allowing them to age the wines longer in barrel. More new wood has definately changed the game.
Close this thread at once! The only correct answer is upon us!
Very true, Larry. 6/7 years old is OLD in my cellar.
Why doesn’t Tom Hill post over here? This is exactly the point that he would weigh in with specific examples and wisdom.
Claude,
Do you know for sure with which vintage Guigal stopped using foudres? I have heard '71, '76, '78 and even early 80’s.
I do post here, Ken. Just not often enough.
Jeb,
I’ve had 20-25 yr old CC Syrahs. Had Bob’s first '82 Syrah, Eastside Paso grapes, with him at HdR about 2003. It was magnificant.
Not in a C-R character, but rather pungent/smokey/coffee character…a bit NorthernRhonish perhaps, but distinctly Calif. Even a bit of
fruit clinging in there. It could probably go another 5 yrs, but that would be pushing it. In that same time frame (17-20 yrs), I had the other two '82
Syrahs from those same grapes. The Ojai was pretty much shot. Too much time in new oak and pretty much dried out. It was the first of
that threesome to die. The BonnyDoon was a bit better, but not by much. Less oak and a bit a fruit still there, but very shakey and drying out. Like many
old wines, interesting nose but not much on the palate.
Interestingly, of those first truly great Calif Syrahs from '82, the one that went the distance was JohnMacCready’s SierraVista/ElDorado Syrah '82, his
first vintage. Very smokey, very Rhonish, very roasted/coffee/espresso, that ElDorado earthiness…and a genuine pleasure to drink. Wouldn’t have wanted to
hold onto it much longer as it would turn into one of those “intellectual experiences”.
I had the first Eberle '77 Syrah at about 12-13 yrs of age in the early '90’s. Another “interesting intellectual experience”, but pretty much on its last legs.
The first Phelps '74 Syrah was pretty much dead & gone before it reached its 10’th BD. WalterShug used way too much new Fr.oak on it. Grapes wern’t
all that good in the first place.
Had the Qupe HillsideEstate '95 (en magnum), his 2’nd one, Tues night. Absolutely magnificant now, classic Lindquist Syrah.
. But I see no reason it won’t go out another 10 yrs.
To address the more general question: If there are any Calif Syrahs out there that I would think will go out 20-30 yrs, it would be the ones that are
based/made w/ restraint and the emphasis on balance. That would easily be, then, the Qupe and EdmundsStJohn. Although they are very/very atypical
of any Calif Syrah, you gotta believe Draper knows a thing or two about making wine for the long haul and the Ridge LyttonSpr Syrahs will probably
go out that far. And I would (or am) put my money on the Failla Estate Syrah. Probably the Lagier-Meredith.
But the really big ones that Parker likes; the SQN, the Lewis, the Konsgaard, Saxum, the recent Jaffurs… it’s a big risk, I think.
That’s it, Ken…used up all my wisdom for today!!! 
Tom
The first time I visited was 1986 or 1987. The wines were essentially all being raised in barrique by then.
This. Balance and initial complexity seem to me to be the keys to wines that age well. That starts in the vineyard and can be overwritten or preserved by the winemaker. Choices to go for high ripeness, high oak, etc usually compromise this and lead to wines that don’t age as well. If you drink your wines < 7 or so years in, I don’t think it will matter but then that’s not aging, that’s just settling.
I really am interested in this topic - and in ‘perceptions’ because at this point, we are somewhat ‘flying blind’ . . .
I will agree with those that say ‘balance and restraint’ are essential, but even these terms are subjective in nature. My guess is that paramount to this would be ‘ripeness’ and this may be expressed in terms of ‘alcohol’. Just note, though, that there is NOT necessarily a direct inverse relationship between alcohol and ageability . . . Many would like to THINK there is, but I do not believe this has been ‘proven’ at this point . . .
What syrahs will stand ‘the test of time’? I agree that Qupe and ESJ have already proven they can - and will continue - to do so. I would also look towards Eberle in Paso - I’ve had some of Gary’s syrahs from the 80’s that were downright tasty at nearly 20 years of age.
Newbies?!?!?! Lagier Meredith certainly would be a possibility. I think those producing fruit from Hudson and Hyde vyds up in Carneros may hold up well - HdV, Truchard, Cakebread, Havens . . . Not sure about Koongsgard, though . . .
Alban? Will be interesting to see . . .
Out for now - but more to follow!!!
Cheers!
Would certainly agree on this point…high alcohol does not necessarily preclude ageability of Syrah.
What syrahs will stand ‘the test of time’? I agree that Qupe and ESJ have already proven they can - and will continue - to do so. I would also look towards Eberle in Paso - I’ve had some of Gary’s syrahs from the 80’s that were downright tasty at nearly 20 years of age.
The Eberles from the last few yrs have not impressed me that much. Many seem to have a brett problem I’ve found.
Newbies?!?!?! Lagier Meredith certainly would be a possibility. I think those producing fruit from Hudson and Hyde vyds up in Carneros may hold up well - HdV, Truchard, Cakebread, Havens . . . Not sure about Koongsgard, though . . .
I wouldn’t link the ageability to a vnyd site myself…though that certainly helps. I think the Kongsgaards, much like the Lewis, are too extracted and will never come together.
Out for now - but more to follow!!!
Gasp…you got opinions on this, Larry??? Who’d have thunk!!!
Tom
Now now, Tom - perhaps I should put ‘Long and Boring’ next to MY posts from now on?!?!?!?!?
This is a great topic and one that I really think deserves more thought . . . that’s all . . .
And you know that when we get togeher next we will BOTH be struggling to get a word in (-:
Cheers!