What do reductive notes indicate about the quality of a Chardonnay (if anything)?

WINE TALK
30

Here’s a related thread from last year:

31

Like I said, even after more pointed suggestions, its going “woosh…” by you. Thanks for another confirmation.

And no, I did not agree with anything you said, to make it clear, doesn’t matter what you think or your take on it. I do think that you need to carefully read what you post, and hopefully, before you post it.

32

Alan, how is that different than my take? Reduction CAN lead to mercaptans, didn’t I say that?

33

Thanks, Alan. I didn’t take any offense to your earlier post and found it informative.

34

Yes, you did. My response was that I don’t really know what “reduction” means in wine. Meadows uses it relentlessly in his tasting notes. But a “reduced” wine, or a wine that suffers from “reduction” has no real meaning, not without some outward character we can perceive. So when someone uses the term “reduction”, we need more descriptive information to understand what they mean. Maybe Meadows has a footnote somewhere that says he means SO2 when he uses the term. Or he means sulfur in some other form. I really don’t know what he means, and I wish he would just say what he means, instead of trying to seem more knowledgeable and using a term that actually means very little in a tasting note.

I’m merely trying to persuade people to avoid the term, and use something more definitive and descriptive. In my own notes, I never use the words “reduced” or “reduction” or anything related. I’ll point out SO2, or I’ll use descriptors like skunky, coffee, rubber, etc.

35

Thanks William. I don’t know much about the Virot family…any info out there on them, other than the couple of brief mentions in Remington Norman’s book?

Thanks for the link…I was just going to search for that. From that thread:

Are you still a non-believer wrt struck match being a sulfur/thiol related compound Alan? The above seems pretty conclusive to me.

It’s my impression that ‘reductive’ winemaking (i.e. sulfur related compounds) has more to do with the lees than anything else. I.e. the wine doesn’t necessarily have to be super low in dissolved oxygen if the lees are prone to sulfur related compounds…and even if the wine has a very low dissolve oxygen, you’re unlikely to get sulfur related compounds if the lees aren’t up for it.

Also, I don’t believe that H2S persists very long in wine (I forget what it turns into tho). But this is a good thing, since H2S is highly toxic!

36

I’d claim that everyone means ‘sulfur related compound’ (aka thiol/disulfide/mercaptan) when they say reduction or reductive winemaking

37

I’d say that was as good as anything I’ve seen to explain “struck match”, but I need a bit more convincing to be sure. The most likely components of a real struck match aroma probably contain phosphorus and not sulfur, but obviously our sense of smell can associate different things with different aromas (e.g., I often think I smell coffee just before I conclude the obvious skunk smell).

As Nick mentioned in that earlier thread, there can be elemental sulfur on grapes left from spraying. And it seems that certain varieties (notably Syrah) have more sulfur-containing amino acids that can be another source of sulfur, as well as SO2.

38

So you don’t think Meadows ever means SO2? If so, I’d love for him to be more descriptive. Because the nature of that aroma tells me something about what it might become in a bottled wine. And that’s a whole lot of barrels that suffer from some kind of thiolic character, a much higher percentage than I’ve encountered in my (admittedly more meager) barrel tastings.

39

Right, there are plenty of sources of sulfur in wine…heck, yeast produce it on their own (from amino acids, and other sources?). The key seems to be the (complex) conditions required to have the thiol form. The main effect of having elemental sulfur (on grapes) getting into the fermenter is to cause the yeast to barf in the wine, or it smells like that’s what it’s doing.

I’m absolutely certain that Meadows knows/tastes the difference between free SO2 in wine, verses sulfur related compounds (thiols/disulfides/whathaveyou). And I do think that Burgundy, esp red Burgundy, and pinots made in that style, are esp prone to reductive compounds. Often times forming after bottling (or getting concentrated enough to detect/taste), and resolving themselves after a year+ (sometimes ++) in bottle (or sometimes never resolving themselves). A dull/tired character in a wine is a common example of this that I see…and with air that goes away and the wine becomes fresh/lively.

40

Never? As in ‘ever after’? Not even one little teensy-weensy little bit? Never ever? pileon

41

The least you should do at this point in the thread is follow it, from Eric, especially, and how it ties into what I said.

42

I often smell skunk before I conclude I was just around the corner from a Starbucks and the source is obvious. Same-same… [snort.gif]


In tasting notes, I strongly agree with you. People should describe what they are experiencing rather than trying to guess and use some not particularly helpful or accurate term, and often enough be flat wrong in the diagnosis, anyway.

43

“Bobby understands…”, not at all.
…but Rilke’s words some it up well, “grasped by what we cannot grasp…and changes us, even if we do not reach it…”

44

While it is true the match head contains mostly phosphorus, to my understanging the distinctive struck match smell of a real match comes partly from sulfur compounds.

Here’s a small quote from wikipedia:

the match head is typically composed of 45–55% potassium chlorate, with a little sulfur and starch, a neutralizer (ZnO or CaCO
3), 20–40% of siliceous filler, diatomite, and glue.

45

This time around my googling turned up some better links. It never made any sense to me that there could be sulfides or mercaptans produced in a match strike; it’s an oxidizing environment, whatever’s there has to be… oxidized (as in SO2), not reduced. Here are some links that (assuming they are accurate) describe some of the chemistry involved:

http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/about-this-show/how-matches-work/

I still think the most likely explanation of the “struck match” aroma in wine is some combination of SO2 and another compound, but what that is I don’t know.

46

[smileyvault-ban.gif]

47

I’m not sure everyone even means the same thing when they write “struck match,” let alone the other terms. There seems to be agreement in this thread regarding the smell, if not the compounds responsible for it. But I’ve seen people use “struck match” for the burning and stinging sensation in the nose that I’ve always thought is caused by high levels of SO2 (is that correct?). While a struck match will produce that sensation, I’ve always used the term for the smell, not the stinging or burning.

48

Same here. I’m sure different people mean different things when they write that (along with lots of other descriptors). Of course “reductive” is an even broader, less distinct term.

Maybe we need a thread asking what someone means when they write “struck match”, but I’m reluctant to start that circus [wow.gif]

49

Since I’m clearly such a moron what with my lack of education in chemistry and winemaking, I have another question. Are Chardonnays produced in a more creamy, lush style exposed to more oxygen in the winemaking process? I assume part of the recipe is riper grapes, likely also some malolactic fermentation, maybe the oak regimine, etc., but I rarely (never?) notice aromas I associate with Chardonnay made in a reductive style with forward, lush Chardonnay. However, those with that temporary sulfurous aroma are almost always more lean, racy, citrus-and-mineral drive in style. Coincidence, stylistic choice, what?