I guess I should have used a pot stirring smile to prevent getting my ass chewed out ⦠since I really donāt know what Arcadian uses ⦠although I thought they often use 50% or above.
Iām often surprised at was has a lot of new oak and what doesnāt Rhys for instance uses a lot of new oak but it doesnāt stand out in the wines. The fruit seems to suck it up and I think that is the biggest factor in how much the oak shows. Well concentrated fruit can suck it in and use it as seasoning. But in many cases it becomes more like a gravy over the wine. And there are probably other factors a non-winemaker like me would not think of.
Too bad heās caught the ear of another winemaker⦠whoās now having vineyard issues and other problems because of it. Very sad.
I am now staying out of the 3 or 4 thread-types that turn into pissing matches. Mostly because I think both sides have valid points, and reality lies somewhere in the middle, so whatās the use?
I am wildly curious to know who youāre referring to, though. For two reasons: one, that a WM would let someone who is not a peer and has never actually made wine influence the type of wine theyāre trying to make (akin to making wine for points, is it not?) and second, because I canāt imagine how itās affecting vineyards (unless itās something having to do with demands for farming buzz phrases like āone cluster per shootā coming from a non-farmer and the growers are just POāed).
I think it certainly takes work to determine the right oak to use with the fruit you have. Itās amazing how much different the same barrel will come across with different fruit. Barrels that I have sworn by some places just simply donāt work elsewhere. I get hypersensitive about oak and so I really appreciate wines that deftly balance their oak. Itās not as easy as it might seem.
I have enjoyed earlier Copains but starting with 2006 it is a pretty big step up. I recommend re-visiting if you like a little more subtlety ⦠but they are still Cali pinot.