Well if we use oxidised to describe all Orange and red wines then it becomes useless as a descriptor.
My point is that more orange wines don’t taste oxidised.
I know. And yes. And no. First of all, I wanted to point out the fallacy in Adam’s reasoning. Orange wines or red wines are not “oxidized” in the sense the term is used in winespeak, since the term normally refers to wines ruined by oxidation. In normal parlance not even Tawny Ports nor Madeira are said to be oxidized, but made oxidatively. Just to remove any possible confusion, I’d talk of calling wine “oxidative” not “oxidized”.
However, that wasn’t my main point. My main point is that it doesn’t make sense to call orange wines nor red wines oxidative, unless they are made in a truly oxidative style. Anybody who has tasted an orange wine or a red wine that has oxidized (spoiled) knows this. There are both red wines and orange wines that are made oxidatively, but only for a small part of total production. A small part of controlled oxidative winemaking during the vinification process does not make a wine particularly oxidative, be it orange wine or a red wine - and this is exactly what you said. Many a high-quality wine requires actually quite a bit of oxidation, which is why - as you pointed out - a vast majority of red wines (and orange wines) are aged with some oxygen exposure, by the use of oak vessels, amphorae or unlined concrete vessels.
If red wines didn’t need to be oxidized we would move them from fermenter to stainless tank. It’s much more efficient and oak flavors do not require barrels.
Oh but there are tons and tons of such wines. Perhaps even a great majority of the world’s wines. It’s just the members of this board never taste such wines. That’s because those wines normally retail somewhere between $4 and $10. But having worked for quite some time in the Finnish alcohol monopoly shops in my past life, I’ve unfortunately got to taste a good deal of them.
In this you are simply wrong. Whites certainly don’t lack in phenolics. For example with Albariño you have to crush very gently not to extract any phenolics because the variety is so high in them the wine can end up aggressively bitter very easily.
Whites are lacking in anthocyanins that are phenolics, but only a small part of them. Otherwise the amount of phenolics depends on the variety and several white varieties can be higher in phenolics than many red varieties. And the combination of these phenolics and low pH protect the wine from oxidation as much as red wine is protected from oxidation during the winemaking. Even if orange wines are made oxidatively, very few show actual oxidative qualities. Having tasted many Georgian kvevri wines that have been macerated for several months with skins yet show no obvious oxidative qualities whatsoever is a rather strong proof of this.
1 Like
I have to agree with Otto on this one. Both in how i use oxidative as a description for the wine i drink, and also that most orange wines i have tasted did not show any distinct oxidative qualities. The oxidative notes from contact with air might be better hidden in wines with a long maceration from a perception perspective? But that just me speculating…
The same way they are in red wines.
I’ve had old-school wines from Barolo and Barbaresco that see two months of skin contact and they show no obvious oxidative qualities whatsoever. The same goes with the orange wines made in the same way.
1 Like
Otto, I never did say whites lack in phenolics. They lack in phenolics or flavonoids that can protect them from oxygen, however technical you want to get with that. You seem to be saying that reds and whites are identical if vinified in the same way. I disagree. Whites oxidize easier, no matter if they’re skin-contact or not (although skin maceration does protect them longer). That’s why the SO2 regimen for whites is done to higher numbers.
I don’t. Or can you point out where I’ve said such a thing?
Instead I’ve just said that white grapes lack anthocyanins - thus white grapes vinified in the same way as reds couldn’t even be identical. And for the most part the things I’ve said here are stuff from what I’ve learned from books, articles and research papers.
Whites oxidize easier, no matter if they’re skin-contact or not (although skin maceration does protect them longer). That’s why the SO2 regimen for whites is done to higher numbers.
Then there might be something wrong in the vinification process. Or then the white varieties used just aren’t suitable for making this certain style of skin maceration wine.
I’ve tasted tons of no-SO2 orange wines with extended periods of skin maceration that have not appeared oxidized in any way. Those orange wines vinified with minimal additions of SO2 I’ve tasted have had a tendency to be less funky than no SO2 wines (surprise!), but I haven’t seen much difference in oxidation - as long as the producer has been good, knowing what they’re doing.
White wines oxidize easier than red wines because they don’t have the phenolics (mainly tannins) that act as a redox buffer against oxidation. Normally white wines are in the range of a few hundred mg/l in phenolic compounds, whereas red wines tend to hover in the ballpark of 1800-4000 mg/l. There’s the difference why white wines might need more SO2 than red wines - the reds are just built to be protected naturally from oxygen. However, SO2 tends to be more effective in white wines than in red wines due to white wines being lower in pH, which decreases the portion of SO2 that gets immediately bound with wine. A white wine with very low pH might need a lot less SO2 than a very high-pH red to be protected from the effects of oxidation.
And actually SO2 really doesn’t protect from oxidation per se - it just binds the byproducts of oxidation. As long as there is enough free SO2, the wine might be quite oxidized and you wouldn’t notice a thing, as the SO2 had bound itself with the byproducts of oxidation, rendering them imperceptible. In essence, SO2 doesn’t stop oxidation in any way. A wine oxidizes no matter how much there is SO2 - the free SO2 just makes it sure that the oxidized elements remain imperceptible.
Otto, I never did say whites lack in phenolics. They lack in phenolics or flavonoids that can protect them from oxygen, however technical you want to get with that.
Can I have some sources to verify your claim? Because what I’ve learned, that is not the case.
First of all, flavonoids are phenolics - and they are found in both red and white grapes. Secondly, no. White grapes do lack in anthocyanins which are the color compunds. The main protective natural element in wine are tannins: when oxygen reacts with monomeric phenols creating hydrogen peroxide - a very reactive compound - the tannins and other phenols are key compounds with which hydrogen peroxide can react with. If there are no tannins, it can oxidize alcohol or aroma compounds, i.e. push wine a little bit toward oxidation. A wine high in tannins is more protected from oxidation than a wine with no tannins - it doesn’t matter what color the wine is.
It is true that red grapes are often higher in phenolic content than white grapes, but there are nevertheless red varieties that are very low in phenolic content (say, Poulsard) and white varieties high in phenolic content (for example the aforementioned Albariño or Georgian Kisi). You can’t just be making such sweeping claims that “white grapes lack in phenolics taht can protect them from oxygen”.
While a skin-contact wine made from lighter white variety and vinified with only short maceration time might be only 1000-1500 mg/l in phenolic content, a typical Georgian amber wine can clock at 2500-3000 mg/l, which is way over an average red wine. These wines are built to last, even without SO2. Combine high acidity and low pH with a minute amount of SO2 and you’ve got a wine that is fully comparable to any red wine in regard to being protected from oxidation.
1 Like
I have had this one with NRS, especially with Dard & Ribo and Hervé Souhaut. Now I know that never leave half a bottle for next day unless you are planning to serve it to japanise people.