Understanding the dumb phase and aging

[Evan_Pontoriero]

As hippy-dippy as it sounds, there have been winemaker explanations as far flung as barometric pressure due to storm fronts to vibrational wave cancellation like in sound. It is real, and chemistry hasn’t been able to figure it out, unsurprisingly. As much of a hassle as it is I like that it makes it that much more impossible to re-create wines through science, keeping the mystery and excitement of wine alive.

[Robert.A.Jr]

Quote: “When is a particular wine at its “best”? This is a question that is often posed, and one that is almost impossible to answer. Why? Because wine is a living, evolving entity, and like we humans, it does not have one particular moment in its life at which it is “optimal.” It goes through many stages, some good and some less so, which is what makes wine—and the human race—so intriguing!”
Annual Newsletters - Spottswoode Winery

Excellent

[Joseph_Grassa]

I agree that looking at CellarTracker is an excellent idea. Dumb phases vary by region, grape variety, vineyard, winery and vintage (and probably a few other things). Do note that as Rory indicates there a lot of people posting notes who cannot tell the difference between a dumb phase and over the hill (very hard to do sometimes and it takes experience, history with the wines from the estate, etc.). If you see a combination of posts some of which indicate the wine is too young and others that the wine is over the hill, you may have found a wine in a dumb stage.

Great point! Thanks for the tip.

[Joseph_Grassa]

As hippy-dippy as it sounds, there have been winemaker explanations as far flung as barometric pressure due to storm fronts to vibrational wave cancellation like in sound. It is real, and chemistry hasn’t been able to figure it out, unsurprisingly. As much of a hassle as it is I like that it makes it that much more impossible to re-create wines through science, keeping the mystery and excitement of wine alive.

Also a great point. As much as I wish I had it figured out now so as to never “waste” a good wine, I can only imagine that it would be pretty miserable not getting to experiment with bottles at different times and experience the changes.

[Brian_Gilp]

As hippy-dippy as it sounds, there have been winemaker explanations as far flung as barometric pressure due to storm fronts to vibrational wave cancellation like in sound. It is real, and chemistry hasn’t been able to figure it out, unsurprisingly. As much of a hassle as it is I like that it makes it that much more impossible to re-create wines through science, keeping the mystery and excitement of wine alive.

Also a great point. As much as I wish I had it figured out now so as to never “waste” a good wine, I can only imagine that it would be pretty miserable not getting to experiment with bottles at different times and experience the changes.

If you can find a wine that you like and isn’t too expensive, it can be very educational to buy a large enough quantity to follow the wine over many years. I bought 3.5 cases of Niepoort Redoma 2001 and still have half a case left. This wine has gone through many different stages including what I believe most would consider a dumb period where it wasn’t as enjoyable as either before or after. But it went through a number of other changes as well that I would never have understood it only having tried 2-3 bottles.

When I worked the tasting room of a small winery, we had one wine that went in and out of a phase 3 or 4 times. For the first 6 months i worked there I thought the wine just wasn’t that good, then it blossomed only to shut back down again a few weeks later and stay that way for a few months. Next time it opened up for longer before shutting down again but not as long this time and then repeated the pattern a few more times before finally leaving this dumb phase for good. Few who don’t work in the business taste the same wine often enough to understand just how wild the ride can be for some wines.

[GregT]

And I don’t think you can really say with confidence that a particular wine will enter it at such and such date and exit at some other fixed date. At least I’ve never heard a single wine maker make predictions with that kind of confidence. It’s the wine drinkers that have the confidence to make those predictions.

Someone once quoted Gaston Huet, the great Vouvray wine producer, saying that you should wait 17 years for his wines to come around. That stuck with me due to its specificity.

Indeed, I quoted that person quoting Huet in a thread three years ago on this very topic. That discussion also contained this memorable comment on the same questions posed by the OP here:

I used to know the answer to this, but I’m going through a dumb phase right now. I will hopefully emerge from it in the future, but you never really know if or when.

And another great quote from Seiber!

Saying you should wait 17 years sounds nice because nobody is going to double check him in 17 years to see if the wine is indeed better. Burt Williams used to say seven years is a good time to drink your Pinot Noir. But those are off the cuff remarks that don’t answer much, other than to say that those guys believed their wines would be better with a little time. They don’t really address the “dumb phase” at all, and they really are more about personal preferences. Some people say you should keep some Rieslings for years, but that doesn’t mean that the people who prefer them younger are wrong, just that they prefer different things.

[john_stimson]

Frankly, these days, aside from checking cellar tracker, one of the best strategies if you are planning ahead is just to post a note on the boards–“Hey–I’m thinking of opening a 99 Giacosa X on Saturday–does anyone have any recent experience–what do you think?” the collective experience on this board and others can be extremely helpful.

[Chris_Seiber]

It’s always a relief to discover that an old quote of yours that gets dredged up wasn’t of the embarrassing stupid ones!

Question for the group:

In my understanding, there has to have been a young open phase which ends beforehand, in order for it now to be a dumb phase. If the wine has just always been “too young and not yet enjoyable,” like a six year old Barolo or something, then it’s just too young and not ready, not in a dumb phase.

I would also guess that the latter (it’s just too young) is far more common than the former (it has entered a dumb phase).

Anyone agree or disagree?

[Wes_Barton]

Explaining it is what is hard, and also why Nate’s post wasn’t entirely wrong. A lot of people assert with confidence that this or that is happening, but that doesn’t mean they’re correct in their assessments, or that they have a clue. Some wines apparently do go through some kind of “dumb” phase, but I think the reasons are likely to vary for each specific wine. And I don’t think you can really say with confidence that a particular wine will enter it at such and such date and exit at some other fixed date. At least I’ve never heard a single wine maker make predictions with that kind of confidence. It’s the wine drinkers that have the confidence to make those predictions.

The OP may gather a lot of information from this thread, but I think his question was best answered by Todd.

The science of what happens and such is pretty much known, but that doesn’t make it predictable for a given wine. Some of it is bonding and unbonding of compounds, where perhaps the bonded form is mute. That can occur in a long phase, but can also happen cyclically in short phases, so if you’re pouring through multiple bottles a wine at an event, you might find one now and then that is “dumb” just because it’s doing its own thing. Set it aside and try it hours later, it may be partially back.

Another factor can be perception. Just because our aroma receptors pick something up does not mean our brain will tell us. Our brains may decide there’s some sort of survival instinct red flag that’s more important than aesthetics and tone down or mute the fruit. Similarly, on the palate tactile sensations can trigger a brain response that mutes flavor. We can get that eating food that’s too spicy hot for us.

[John_Morris]

And I don’t think you can really say with confidence that a particular wine will enter it at such and such date and exit at some other fixed date. At least I’ve never heard a single wine maker make predictions with that kind of confidence. It’s the wine drinkers that have the confidence to make those predictions.

Someone once quoted Gaston Huet, the great Vouvray wine producer, saying that you should wait 17 years for his wines to come around. That stuck with me due to its specificity.

Indeed, I quoted that person quoting Huet in a thread three years ago on this very topic. That discussion also contained this memorable comment on the same questions posed by the OP here:

I used to know the answer to this, but I’m going through a dumb phase right now. I will hopefully emerge from it in the future, but you never really know if or when.

And another great quote from Seiber!

Saying you should wait 17 years sounds nice because nobody is going to double check him in 17 years to see if the wine is indeed better. Burt Williams used to say seven years is a good time to drink your Pinot Noir. But those are off the cuff remarks that don’t answer much, other than to say that those guys believed their wines would be better with a little time. They don’t really address the “dumb phase” at all, and they really are more about personal preferences. Some people say you should keep some Rieslings for years, but that doesn’t mean that the people who prefer them younger are wrong, just that they prefer different things.

Actually, I’m sure the late and generous Joe Doherty did. He certainly had a deep enough collection of Huet to corroborate the contention!

[cjsadler]

Cellartracker is great for navigating the dumb phase, but I find the Coravin to be of nice use here-- taking a small sample to see where a wine is at and whether I should be opening it or not.

[Jeff_M1]

Wine definitely goes through phases as it ages. It is helpful to have some type of history with the wine to know or best guess when to drink it. I’d rather not drink a wine too young or too late. Finding that middle ground between the two will vary by varietal, wine maker, etc. Its always neat to do a library vertical tasting to see also how wine varies from year to year.

[Jozef.P]

Someone once quoted Gaston Huet, the great Vouvray wine producer, saying that you should wait 17 years for his wines to come around. That stuck with me due to its specificity.

Indeed, I quoted that person quoting Huet in a thread three years ago on this very topic. That discussion also contained this memorable comment on the same questions posed by the OP here:

And another great quote from Seiber!

Saying you should wait 17 years sounds nice because nobody is going to double check him in 17 years to see if the wine is indeed better. Burt Williams used to say seven years is a good time to drink your Pinot Noir. But those are off the cuff remarks that don’t answer much, other than to say that those guys believed their wines would be better with a little time. They don’t really address the “dumb phase” at all, and they really are more about personal preferences. Some people say you should keep some Rieslings for years, but that doesn’t mean that the people who prefer them younger are wrong, just that they prefer different things.

Actually, I’m sure the late and generous Joe Doherty did. He certainly had a deep enough collection of Huet to corroborate the contention!

This is a coincidence as I was just looking for notes on older Huet Vouvrays, as I have access to the following at a local restaurant at decent pricing:

• Huet Le Mont Sec 1983
  
  
  
• Huet Le Haut-Lieu Sec 1986
  
  
  
• Huet Le Haut-Lieu Sec 1987
  
  
  
• Huet Le Haut-Lieu Sec 1988
  
  
  
• Domaine Foreau Sec 2000
  
  
  
• Domaine Foreau Moelleux 1996

They are certain older than 17 years, but does that mean open for business or … down the hill? I know moelleux versions could age a long time, but dry ones? I don’t think storage will have been an issue, as the bottles likely come from a local cellar.

[Ian_S]

There is a definite correlation.

Between men under 25 and wine not showing well?

[Jim_Stewart]

There is a definite correlation.

Between men under 25 and wine not showing well?

Ha! That’s also true, but my drift was: If you age long enough your chances of entering a dumb phase are very high! (both witnessed AND experienced)

[Marcu_Stanley]

Explaining it is what is hard, and also why Nate’s post wasn’t entirely wrong. A lot of people assert with confidence that this or that is happening, but that doesn’t mean they’re correct in their assessments, or that they have a clue. Some wines apparently do go through some kind of “dumb” phase, but I think the reasons are likely to vary for each specific wine. And I don’t think you can really say with confidence that a particular wine will enter it at such and such date and exit at some other fixed date. At least I’ve never heard a single wine maker make predictions with that kind of confidence. It’s the wine drinkers that have the confidence to make those predictions.

Don’t agree with this, at least not for Bordeaux. I’ve found Bordeaux extremely predictable – drink it in the first 2-3 years after bottling, so maybe 5-6 years after vintage date, or else wait somewhere between 13 to 15 years from vintage for “smaller” vintages and 16 to 20 years for bigger “vin de garde” vintages. If you just set 15 years from vintage for smaller vintages and 20 for tannic “vin de garde” ones you will rarely go wrong IME. There are exceptions, like 1995 LB took more like 23-25 years to open, but it’s pretty reliable.

Burgundy seems much less predictable and linear however.

What I would really like to know is the scientific causes. It seems crazy that a phenomenon that is so incredibly important to wine is so poorly understood. Everyone’s explanations seem to be mystical or metaphorical rather than the biochemistry one would expect if it was really understood.

[Charlie_Carnes]

I think it’s essentially a trash-can term. It could mean that the wine is very reductive, that the individual bottle was bad, or that the wine was never any good to begin with.

Totally disagree.

While I think the concept of a dumb phase is real, the term sometimes seems to be applied as Nate suggests – as an excuse for a mediocre wine. That’s where some knowledge of the specific wine or its type, and the vintage, is essential.

Right on!

[James_Billy]

As hippy-dippy as it sounds, there have been winemaker explanations as far flung as barometric pressure due to storm fronts to vibrational wave cancellation like in sound. It is real, and chemistry hasn’t been able to figure it out, unsurprisingly. As much of a hassle as it is I like that it makes it that much more impossible to re-create wines through science, keeping the mystery and excitement of wine alive.

Also a great point. As much as I wish I had it figured out now so as to never “waste” a good wine, I can only imagine that it would be pretty miserable not getting to experiment with bottles at different times and experience the changes.

If you can find a wine that you like and isn’t too expensive, it can be very educational to buy a large enough quantity to follow the wine over many years. I bought 3.5 cases of Niepoort Redoma 2001 and still have half a case left. This wine has gone through many different stages including what I believe most would consider a dumb period where it wasn’t as enjoyable as either before or after. But it went through a number of other changes as well that I would never have understood it only having tried 2-3 bottles.

When I worked the tasting room of a small winery, we had one wine that went in and out of a phase 3 or 4 times. For the first 6 months i worked there I thought the wine just wasn’t that good, then it blossomed only to shut back down again a few weeks later and stay that way for a few months. Next time it opened up for longer before shutting down again but not as long this time and then repeated the pattern a few more times before finally leaving this dumb phase for good. Few who don’t work in the business taste the same wine often enough to understand just how wild the ride can be for some wines.

Interesting. Did you open bottles regularly that showed the same characters and then later open multiple other bottles at a later date that all showed a very different phases? Then you could rule out cork variability.

[Brian_Gilp]

Also a great point. As much as I wish I had it figured out now so as to never “waste” a good wine, I can only imagine that it would be pretty miserable not getting to experiment with bottles at different times and experience the changes.

If you can find a wine that you like and isn’t too expensive, it can be very educational to buy a large enough quantity to follow the wine over many years. I bought 3.5 cases of Niepoort Redoma 2001 and still have half a case left. This wine has gone through many different stages including what I believe most would consider a dumb period where it wasn’t as enjoyable as either before or after. But it went through a number of other changes as well that I would never have understood it only having tried 2-3 bottles.

When I worked the tasting room of a small winery, we had one wine that went in and out of a phase 3 or 4 times. For the first 6 months i worked there I thought the wine just wasn’t that good, then it blossomed only to shut back down again a few weeks later and stay that way for a few months. Next time it opened up for longer before shutting down again but not as long this time and then repeated the pattern a few more times before finally leaving this dumb phase for good. Few who don’t work in the business taste the same wine often enough to understand just how wild the ride can be for some wines.

Interesting. Did you open bottles regularly that showed the same characters and then later open multiple other bottles at a later date that all showed a very different phases? Then you could rule out cork variability.

Yes for both cases. With the Redoma, we opened probably 5 bottles over an 1.5 period that just didn’t show well. We had opened a number of bottles both before and after that were consistently good. The bottles after the “dumb” phase were different than before and over time did go through subtle changes as well but results were consistent enough and with enough bottles that I don’t believe bottle variation was the cause.

At the winery, I worked almost every Saturday and the occasional other day. As I was generally opening the tasting room, I tasted every wine at the start of the day as well as and any new wines opened during the day. So I was tasting the same wine weekly and often multiple times per week. The wine in question (1988 merlot) was one of 7 wines on the tasting list at that time and the only one to show these changes.

[James_Billy]

Thanks for the detailed response. That’s very interesting and useful for this debate.

It’s all a bit Schrödinger’s cat if you are only opening a few bottles over an extended period.