Just wondering if the Auslese is generally of more serious, higher quality than the Spatlese of any given producer, or is it just sugar levels, stylistic differences? Does anyone prefer the Spatleses?
Thanks
Here is a good resource for some of your questions, written by a buddy of mine.
for drinking and for the balance of the wine, I personally prefer the Spatlese level. Auslese tends to become less sweet as it ages (why, I don’t know), but I still prefer Spatlese–just a personal preference; Auslese is in that awkward spot between a dinner drink and a dessert wine.
alan
The various pradikat levels are driven by must weight (how much sugar in in the must). The result is that a higher pradikat will usually have a riper flavor profile than one below it (and usually more unfermented sugar in the finished wine).
The answer regarding quality and seriousness can get a bit philosophical because higher pradikat levels will often correlate with more dry extract in the wines leading to more fruit complexity and richness. I think we as “fine” wine drinkers in America have been socialized to automatically equate increased richness and complexity with quality. The problem is that it is a zero sum game and the cost of increased ripeness is less elegance and minerality. Is richness and complexity more desirable than elegance and minerality? I think thats a question that each wine drinker must answer for themselves. Me personally, I like the variety of styles that the pradikat system manifests and don’t feel the differences are qualitative.
Its worth noting that in the last 10 years, the warmer German climat has resulted in Auslese wines often pushing dessert wine levels of sense of sweetness (SOS). That makes them less helpful in many meal situations and I usually treat Auslese wines as something to sip before or after dinner.
Here’s another little twist to add to the separation between Spatlese and Auslese.
Some producers will bottle as Spatlese even though the QmP qualifies as Auslese.
It usually occurs with some of the better producers. I remember when we were purchasing the entire
production from a specific vineyard that our labeling as Kabinett stayed that way, even though the
wine in some years qualified as Spatlese. I learned from the producer that this often occurred up the
chain as well.
Hank ![[cheers.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/0ff9bfcdb0964982cd3240b6159868fbdf215b1a.gif "cheers"){kind=small}
for drinking and for the balance of the wine, I personally prefer the Spatlese level. Auslese tends to become less sweet as it ages (why, I don’t know), but I still prefer Spatlese–just a personal preference; Auslese is in that awkward spot between a dinner drink and a dessert wine.
alan
Agree, but I like my Auslese with a good bit of age so it tastes drier. I think the richness goes well with many dishes.
I generally prefer Spatlese, and am a big Kabinett fan as well. Like Alan, Auslese is in a tricky spot for me foodwise, I usually pair with cheese, which can be fantastic. And like Eric said, with Auslese, they’re better for me with some age. I like the weight, and when they’ve dried out a bit and gained complexity, that’s when I love them. But even young, Spats are more likely to really hit the balance I like.
Cheers,
-Robert
It is a style difference, not a quality difference. I probably drink spatlese 3:1 over auslese.
All good responses and I agree with much of what’s been said. It still begs the question that when German QMP wines are reviewed there is a definate correlation between Praedikat level and scores. Whether it is WS or WA or others Kabinetts usually top out at about 92 pts, Spaetlese at about 95, etc. The only 100 pt German wines I’ve ever seen were TBAs. Food for thought.
Ken
if there are score differences that correlate only to pradikat level, that simply shows up the inadequacy of the taster if he’s unable to evaluate the wine independently of the sugar content. Aand if the wines aren’t tasted blind, in peer groups, it’s amplified.
Not to get into a digression regarding blind vs non-blind tasting, but if you’ve got the producer or the importer grinning at you while you’re tasting thru his line-up and he’s telling you how dry the grapes were and how carefully they were picked, and especially if you’re going from dry to sweet, the Auslese seems more “serious” and the TBA even more so. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone post that he or she has tasted Spatlesen as a group blind, Auslesen as a group bind, etc. If I’m doing a tasting, that’s exactly what we do, and they’re going to be different days too, but that’s not going to happen when people go to importer tastings or to the vineyards to taste. WA does not taste that way, I’m not sure what WS does but I’m going to ask.
In any case, there’s nothing inherently more serious about one than about the other.
I totally agree with your observation.
My preference lies with Kabinett and Spatlese, as they are more versatile with foods.
Scores don’t matter. What matters is how the wine suits the meal, the mood and the drinker’s preferences.
Not many folks open a TBA or Eiswein to go with their meal, no matter how many points it received.
And as for declassification - if people suddenly started bottling wines at the legal minimums for the German pradikats (e.g. kabinett just meeting kabinett must weight requirements), the vast majority of Germany’s new fans would run the other way so fast it would make your head spin. Yes a few stalwarts would keep buying and declare how wonderful it is that German Riesling had returned to its old style, but the genre would die for lack of funds.
Add me to the list of people who prefer Spatlese and Kabinett, though well-aged Auslese (say 10+ years) that has started to dry out can be ethereal and a good match for foods such as smoked fish.
With the string of relatively warm vintages over the past 20 years, there has been “pradikat creap”-- a kind of reverse grade inflation – with many wines actually qualifying for the classification above the one on their label. I think that’s one reason I find myself increasingly preferring Kabinetts.
Just to stir the pot, I would add that I rarely get that excited by BA’s and TBA’s. They can be wonderful nectars, but I prefer the lightness and acid/sugar tension of the lower level wines.
The problem there is that the “spatlese” group could still include an auslese labeled spatlese which is probably going to seem impressive in its surroundings for no legitimate reason…
The problem there is that the “spatlese” group could still include an auslese labeled spatlese which is probably going to seem impressive in its surroundings for no legitimate reason…
I taste extensively every year in Germany and in most recent vintages it’s actually the opposite. Many of the spaetlesen are actually harvested at auslese must weights. Realistically the only solution is to taste the wines and buy the ones you like regardless of the pradikat. I bought a couple of cases of 2009 Erdener Praelat Auslese Trocken from Erni Loosen which knocked my socks off. If I hadn’t tasted it I would have passed on it.
You’re saying the same thing: Auslese is often “declassified” and labeled Spatlese.