Adding tartaric acid seems to be one of most common “interventions” in wine making. Even the minimalist (by US standards at least) Ridge Vineyards does it when advantageous, I noticed by their candid write-up of their Wine Ingredients at the Lytton Springs tasting room.*
* It was cool to see in their poster that the Geyserville bottling (my favorite of their zinfandel-based wines) typically does not need acidification even when their other vineyards do.*
I ask this question because I find myself writing tasting notes remarking on the unusual–and presumably remarkable-- combination of fruit and acid in some wines. Given what we know about the biology of ripening, there’s in general a trade off between (natural) acid and (natural) sugar, so it can seem pretty special when a wine dances between the extremes.
I guess I don’t have anything profound to say here, except that knowing that tartaric acid is in a wine maker’s quiver takes away some of the magic of wine for me.
I can’t recall, but are European wineries allowed to add acid (and other things) or is that restricted by appellation rules?
Any wine makers care to chime in on the practice of adding ingredients to wine? I can see it being necessary in some extreme years (or in the case of 2010 German, de-acidifying), but if adding acid makes a better wine (and which can age the same way as the raw juice), why doesn’t everyone do it I wonder?
The reason everyone doesn’t add acid is because not everyone needs to add it. Total acid levels in wine (usually expressed as tartaric) vary by grape variety, grape maturity and, more importantly, by location/climate (acid can be lowered during winemaking).
In cool climates, acidity will generally be higher than in warm climates. In hot climates, acidity can be seriously low. Those who add tartaric to boost overall acidity likely are located in warm to hot climates–or they are purposely over-maturing grapes for some other and possibly more nefarious reason than to add acid.
The way some see it, since tartaric is the major part of a grape’s natural acid profile, it’s difficult to support the claim that adding tartaric acid is adding an ingredient. Rather than an ingredient addition, they view acid addition as an adjustment, even when they may have purposely caused the low acid levels.
As you probably know, tartaric acid is the most plentiful in grapes. As grapes ripen, total acids begin to fall and sugars begin to rise. As others have said, depending upon vintage conditions and varieties, acids will either be retained better or fall out faster.
It is certainly not a crime to add acid to wine if need be. If you read the other thread, Adam Lee gives a perfect example of why he does it from time to time. My belief is that if I don’t need to add it, I certainly won’t, but if the must needs it, I certainly will. (Note that nearly all acid additions are made prior to fermentation beginning so that it integrates well).
There are wineries that will add acid right before bottling- and if not done right, it will stick out like a sore thumb to me.
Certain vintages lead to wines that appear to be more acidic than others, too. Take 2010, for instance - a very cool vintage where malic levels remained quite high as did total acids. There are many wines from that vintage the seemed to have higher than normal acids.
I guess I should consider wine a recipe and admire certain chefs for their excellent creations, which sometimes is getting out of the way and letting the raw materials shine.
In fact, according to the Ridge notes, it is the antithesis of adding acid on the Geyserville. In 2009 and 2010 and 2011 they added calcium carbonate to lower the acid.
Hmmm - I wonder how ‘controversial’ that practice is - of doing something to REDUCE acid levels? And Adam, and idea of whether this is ‘allowed’ and therefore common in Burgundy in cool vintages?
As Larry notes, sometimes it’s needed. But I don’t know anyone who adds acid if it isn’t.
Lowering acid, OTOH, scares me. I have seen calcium carbonate additions that lowered acid too much and, from what that winemaker told me, it is difficult to stop the reaction once initiated. Imagine the cycle that sets up.
Best, Jim
Pat, I can honestly say that I don’t like acidification. I’m sure there’s a threshold and minor acid corrections are likely beyond my ability to discern, but ultimately I find moderate to significant acidification to taste unnatural.
I’m sure most of us have tasted those 15.5%+ ABV explosive wines with bright acidity. (3.5-3.6) Whenever I tastes these types of wine my mind seemingly rejects that it’s real. It tastes fake and whether it’s true or not, I don’t feel like think they age well either. I would much rather the winemaker live with their decisions in the vineyard. If they want to pick late, then let the wine be 3.8+ PH. I feel like that’s the representation of their site and their style, so let it be.
For example, I asked Nick Elliot when visiting Nicora if he acidified his wines. He said he did not and that while he did not want his wines to fall apart after a few years, he was accepting that he might bottle a wine with naturally low acid. After tasting, you can certainly tell that some might be lacking bright acidity, but they were round, generous and expressive. Most importantly though, they tasted genuine and I appreciated it for what it was. Depending on the vintage, they will simply be what I enjoy while waiting for other wines to mature - they certainly have their place in the cellar. Now I don’t want to put Nick into a corner and say that he might not ever acidify in the future, I can’t say for sure.
I understand why winemakers choose to make small “corrections” in the cellar but I see it as something that should be the exception rather than the rule. It’s the cosmetic makeup of wine - if something outside your control happens it’s certainly fair to mask it, but as a rule I don’t think it’s a good idea to slather it on until someone looks like somebody else. If you’re doing that year in year out, you simply wonder what their true identity really is. And I don’t believe a lack of identity is good for wine as a whole.
Just one more thought. I often feel wine is quite similar to music - albeit an entirely different medium. Some artists rely heavily on sound engineers and tuning devices to “correct” their voice, so to speak. While this is their decision and it no doubt makes their music fit for mass-consumption with little flaws or dissonance, it can never be as pure and soulful as an artist with an authentic and true voice. Maybe it’s raspy and raw like Louis Armstrong, maybe it’s satin like Mel Torme - it doesn’t really matter how different they are. What matters is that they’re authentic and real.
That’s an interesting way to view it, and one can look at chefs such as Alice Waters (for leeting ingredients shine through simple preparations) and Ferran Adria (for doing amazing things with/to ingredients) on the etreme ends of their professions. Both are celebrated for what they have done. I am sure both have their critics as well.
Hmm…I was working on my notes on the 2012 Hirsch Vineyard Pinot Noir yesterday and can’t help reflect on them when you talk about your mind rejecting what is “real.”
Adam, I want to be very careful here because I don’t want to pass any judgment. I can only speak for myself and what matters to me. While I certainly feel like my values are “true” and right - I certainly do not want to be arrogant or judgmental. Even further, I do not want to offend.
Without full knowledge of your vineyards and what you want to accomplish it’s difficult for me to say. Pinot Noir is no doubt one of the most difficult varietals to deal with and I don’t envy you. This is especially true since you’re dealing with a single grape. My intuition as a taster, not as a winemaker, would be to blend blocks or vineyard sites (possibly co-ferment) to try and find some harmony in the glass. Maybe whole cluster influence will give relief to high acids, assuming the stems are suitable. Maybe sur-lie would give texture and relief to bright acidity as well.
In terms of single vineyards - I would think that not every vineyard would be suitable for single-bottlings every year. In some cases they may be, but not every year. However like instruments in an orchestra, one vineyard may be the brass one year and the other the bass. While alone they may not be altogether pleasant, together they may be harmonious. I suppose that’s the task of the winemaker each year - to identify the instruments they have at their disposal and to place them together that they may be greater than their parts. In some cases, a vineyard may be like the violin and present something hauntingly beautiful all on it’s own and altogether harmonious. In this case, it should speak for itself and no doubt represents some of the greatest achievements of wine.
The other element here is obviously that of economics. When combined with elements outside our control (the weather) it puts a lot on winemakers to try and put out wine that is high quality. There’s no judgment here and I completely understand that. Being a taster it allows me to live in a world of ideals, without the harsh realities that a winemaker might have to deal with. Obviously I look at wine through a lens of what I may want it to be or should be. While winemakers do this too, they have to deal with the realities of when they’re given something short of what they wanted. But again, I speak more of cellar corrections as the exception, rather than the rule.
Adam, I always find your input and numbers interesting.
Are your numbers from the field or the fermentor? If the fermentor, how well mixed is the must? Are these numbers from the juice or a must/juice mixture? I’m assuming they’re prior to any fermentation. Approximately how many samples are used to derive these numbers? In the field, a single cluster with millerandange might have extremes of ripeness and acidity? In the fermentor, at what point do millerandange clusters become a homogenous must?..or are unripe/underripe grapes always removed at the sorting table?
I’m sure experience has a lot to do with acidification decisions, and not strictly the numbers? I would imagine there’s some finger crossing involved.
Andrew Morris from Briceland wrote in the other thread:
Lastly, it is worth mentioning that added acid is very hard to tell from natural acid. I have seen more than one well respected taster claim that a no add (under ripe)wine had been acidified and praise a wine for its balanced acid that did have acid added.
It’s pretty hard for us customers to opine about acidification of wine, since we rarely actually know which of the wines we are drinking were and were not acidified and if so, to what extent.
I suspect that many people who are critics of acidification are simply assuming that the wines and producers that they like don’t do it, but who knows if that is even the case, and there are probably some big spoonfuls of embarrassment out there for anyone who professes to be too sure that they can tell.
At the end of the day, I’d say just buy and drink the wines you like, and don’t bother yourself with trying to guess or discover whether they were acidified or not. If you love the wine, then whatever acid the winemaker did or didn’t add is probably just right for you.
Chris, I still think there is something to be said for genuine beauty or something of an authentic nature. This delves into things of a more theoretical or philosophical nature, rather than a practical one. So let’s posit a simple question:
“If you found a wine truly remarkable, would you prefer that it were totally natural with no cellar corrections, or would you prefer that it received acid additions, reverse osmosis and more?”
My opinion, and it may be totally wrong, would be that most, if not all, would prefer that it was totally natural with the belief that it was of a more special or genuine nature that the wine was self-sufficiently harmonious. Of course, some will undoubtedly say that they “don’t care”. I’m not sure I believe this and I don’t think it entirely honest. We want to believe that the things we relate to are real and authentic. Now some may only be truly concerned with how things actually taste and care not for the romantic or philosophical nature of wine, but that’s not how I and many others feel. No passing judgment here, we just feel differently. I can’t say with any certainty that my position is right and in the effort of being agreeable and respectful I’d rather adopt the position that both sides are fair.
Another possible question: If I offered you a 24 hour pill that would make every wine you taste during that time absolutely marvelous (including Apothic Red!), would you take it? If you did take it, would you tire of it? How would you feel knowing that your experience, while real to you, was not necessarily representative of reality, but was rather something else?
This is obviously an extreme example and I’m not at all relating acidification to something like this, but it’s merely meant to evoke the idea that “authenticity” is an “end” in itself and something worthy of pursuit.
A related question. I have a bottle of Pinot that I know is spoofed. The winemaker let me taste from the low-alcohol spinning cone barrel, which was interesting. In addition to being a blend of high-alcohol barrels with that low-alcohol barrel, suspect it was also acidified, though I don’t know for sure.
So, I just drank a bottle of that wine and it had tartrate crystals, which I am used to in white wine. I was wondering how often it occurs naturally in red wines versus acidified red wines.
So now the question. Is the presence of tartrate crystals in red wine an indicator of acidification? I am not asking for a certainty, just a Bayesian guess.
Gracefully written, as always, Taylor. I always enjoy reading your posts and find them enlightening.
I understand what you are saying, and the underlying notion is why so many products are marketed as “100% natural” and so forth, because people like that romantic idea.
But I think the wine customer only gets to approach it from the opposite direction of your question. The customer doesn’t get to find a wine they like and choose whether it was made with no cellar corrections versus that it had sugar, acid, water or something else added to it. Instead, the wine is made the way it’s made, and then the customer tries it and sees if he likes it, 99% of the time having no idea what things the winemaker did after harvest to make the wine be that way.
And I think if you were in the business of making wine, and that was how you made your living and supported your family and all as opposed to it being a hobby, you’d probably start out with this idea that you’re going to make everything naturally with no additions etc. But then the unpredictability and vagaries of mother nature and living organisms throw you some curve balls, and you suddenly face the choice of bottling and selling an inferior or possibly unstable/spoiled wine, or making some adjustments with things like adding sugar, tartaric acid, water and/or SO2 to make a better product for your customer and for your business. Then the theory runs into the reality and the decisions are more difficult.
I appreciate that Chris, that means a lot, thank you! Hopefully my comma splices aren’t too excessive - at least they’re not ellipses!
No doubt Chris. I was thinking about that after my post. We definitely have to reconcile our ideals with reality. I suppose the best course of action would be to exhaust all natural means to deliver a wine that’s harmonious, but to use cellar corrections only if necessary to carry it across the “goal line” so to speak. In an Aristotelian way, perhaps we try and get as close as possible to some “ideal” as we can and that would be our best course of action. Reality has the impact of forcing our hand and making us flexible in our line of thinking - but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a better or worse way, even if the “best” option is taken off the table.
Of course, different producers with different varietals and different vineyards are all impacted differently. Before the chemistry was available, old world producers were dependent on blending varietals with different characteristics and different ripening cycles in order to create a harmonious wine. However that affords a lot more options than those like Adam who are trying to do seemingly do the impossible - create an altogether harmonious wine, every year, with only one varietal.
Personally, I wouldn’t dare venture into that if I were a winemaker. I’d be entirely dependent on some type of traditional Bordeaux or Rhone blend to try and create wines of harmony as naturally as possible with the hope that the variety would afford me flexibility. No wonder Burgundy is so maddening!
What I don’t think can be really disputed is that there are ideals and “virtues” (if you will) to wine and that we should seek to express them in what we do. (and the same with all of our professions!) Hopefully our goal is to reach those virtues as best as we can.
I guess the real question underlying this all may be less “what do you think of the practice of acidifying” than it is about what frequent and/or large acid additions are saying about the wine overall.
It’s sort of like watering back. Tap water seems to be the least “foreign” thing of all the things that are ever added to wine (sugar, SO2, tartaric acid, yeast, oak, yeast nutrients, etc. etc.). Yet the thing about watering back is that it allows wines to be harvested at higher Brix and lower acid without becoming 16-18% alcohol. So the issue isn’t water, per se, which is already what most of wine is made of, but whether watering back is going hand in hand with a trend towards a style of wine that isn’t what a given person may like.
Is that your concern about acidification, Taylor, that it’s a crutch that allows winemakers to cross the line for your tastes in ripeness, site/variety selection, etc.?
So it may be that some winemakers are making balanced wines and using acidification selectively and just to make corrections to occasional imbalances, while others use it extensively and regularly so they can harvest at extremely high Brix and make a very ripe and lush wine. The former category may fall into the “it’s just as well the customer doesn’t know or be bothered with it” category while the latter category may be what many of us (subjectively) prefer to avoid.
Is that a helpful way to think of it? I’m just sort of brainstorming here.