What does this wine characteristic mean?

[J_a_y_H_a_c_k]

I was just reading an auction catalogue and came across the review below of 1999 Redigaffi. I do not recall seeing a reference to “dry extract” before. To what is the reviewer referring? What is a “normal” level. What does an “astonishing” level mean as to the taste or other characteristics of the wine?


“The 250-case cuvée of 100% Merlot, the 1999 Redigaffi has an astonishing 36 grams per liter of dry extract, which exceeds most top Pomerols in a great vintage! Unfined and unfiltered, it is as close to perfection as a wine can get. The color is a deep saturated blue/purple. The powerful, pure nose offers smoke, licorice, black cherry, and blackberries. It boasts awesome concentration, a fabulously dense, viscous mid-section, and a finish that lasts for nearly a minute. This is riveting juice.”(99pts)

[Chris_Blum]

It is meant here as a descriptor of the wine’s body. The higher the number, the more “stuff” other than water and alcohol. PX would have a high number, ports the same.

[Michael_S_Monie]

My guess would be that it would account for flavor intensity and textural thickness.

[Chris_Blum]

I think moreso the latter, but often related I suppose.

[Jay_Miller]

@Michael S. Monie

My guess would be that it would account for flavor intensity and textural thickness.

I thought that texture came from throwing some oak chips in a Vitamix and blending it with the wine

[Gene_M]

Dry extracts (DE) are the powdery solids that are left over after taking away the sugar, water, ethanol, and acid from wine, all of which are major components. (To separate out these items, you will likely need a centrifuge.) Dry extracts are made up of minerals and trace elements such as potassium, phosphorus, iron, calcium, and magnesium; associated with the soil in which the vine grows and affect the biology of the plant and its resulting fruit. (i.e some micro-nutrients are really small in qty like zinc, manganese etc… so mostly potassium, calcium)

WSET suggests it as a ‘secondary’ flavor and aroma term.

The higher the dry extract count, the heavier the wine is. The normal range of dry extract grams per liter for white wine is 15 to 20, and for reds, it’s 20 to 30, although you can find wines outside these ranges. The dry extract count is not usually readily available on a bottle, and it doesn’t need to be, because ‘light’, ‘medium’, or ‘full bodied’, descriptors usually are in place in tasting notes. DE quantities can usually found in the technical sheets along with the alcohol, total acid, and residual sugar levels.

so its a buttload of stuff from non filtered. non fined wine probably grown by vines that suck major nutrients and might have retained them in the juice unless you wanna believe …

[John_Morris]

Jay: Ever heard of this thing called Google?

WS’s Dr. Vinny responded to a very similar question thus:

Dry extract refers to the solid part of the wine—the powdery stuff that would be left if you removed all the water and alcohol from a wine (presumably, after playing with a centrifuge).

This is an extremely technical term, but it’s pretty easy to see how dry extract relates to the body of a wine: The more dry extract, the heavier, thicker or bigger the wine. Generally, the solids of a white wine lie around 15 to 20 grams per liter, while red wines are closer to 20 to 30 grams per liter. So, yeah, 37 grams per liter of dry extract is pretty “whopping.”

Or, more like “big whoop.” I don’t know many winemakers who look at dry extract (thought it’s required analysis for export to some countries). I’ve heard the term used to explain the popularity of riper wines, because higher dry extract can balance or even hide higher sugar levels in wine. But for the most part, it’s not a term that’s very useful to wine lovers.

I assume when he says, “The more dry extract, the heavier, thicker or bigger the wine,” he means “other things being equal.” Alcohol and any residual sugar also play a big role in the perception of a wine’s “scale.”

[J_a_y_H_a_c_k]

@John Morris

Jay: Ever heard of this thing called Google?
. . .

But then there would be no reason to be here in the first place.

And besides, it’s not like Google never gives incorrect information.

[John_Morris]

And WB is so much more reliable.

In practice, I think it’s most often used by people who want to sound sophisticated and knowledgeable when all they mean is “it’s a big, concentrated wine.” In other words, it’s usually just pseudo-scientific.

As a footnote, the appellation rules for Barolo require a minimum dry extract of 23 grams/liter.

[Jeff_Vaughan]

@John Morris

In practice, I think it’s most often used by people who want to sound sophisticated and knowledgeable when all they mean is “it’s a big, concentrated wine.” In other words, it’s usually just pseudo-scientific.

Maybe, but not always. In general, I would say I don’t like big, concentrated white wines. When I taste a big and concentrated wine, I rarely think of the term dry extract. Often, I find they are are thick, oaky, oily, heavy, etc. Every once in a while I’ll taste a white wine when dry extract comes to mind. To me, it means a grippy, dry texture in a white. It is usually in a young and concentrated wine as you said. I’ve probably only used it a few times for something like a young white burgundy, dry Chenin or Riesling. In other words, I think a wine can be big and concentrated but not necessarily show dry extract.

I’ve never thought of using it for a red wine, but perhaps it is because I am likely thinking about it in terms of tannin.

[Howard_Cooper]

I think of dry extract as being different from big. I think of big often being caused by high alcohol, high tannins, new oak, etc. I think of a wine with reasonable alcohol levels, old oak and high extract levels as being concentrated, not big.

[John_Morris]

@Jeff Vaughan

In general, I would say I don’t like big, concentrated white wines. When I taste a big and concentrated wine, I rarely think of the term dry extract. Often, I find they are are thick, oaky, oily, heavy, etc. Every once in a while I’ll taste a white wine when dry extract comes to mind. To me, it means a grippy, dry texture in a white. It is usually in a young and concentrated wine as you said. I’ve probably only used it a few times for something like a young white burgundy, dry Chenin or Riesling. In other words, I think a wine can be big and concentrated but not necessarily show dry extract.

I’ve never thought of using it for a red wine, but perhaps it is because I am likely thinking about it in terms of tannin.

I don’t know whether dry extract explains what you perceive as “grippy, dry” whites. It might be acid or something from skin contact, and I have no idea whether those imply more dry extract. That’s an objective measure, scientifically defined. It’s not defined by human perceptions.

[John_Morris]

@Howard Cooper

I think of dry extract as being different from big. I think of big often being caused by high alcohol, high tannins, new oak, etc. I think of a wine with reasonable alcohol levels, old oak and high extract levels as being concentrated, not big.

While Googling the rules for Barolo, I came on the data sheets for a number of wines, and most seem to be under 30g/l of dry extract. Yet most of those would come across as very concentrated and dense, because of their alcohol and tannin.

Which just reinforces the point that, while other things being equal, dry extract may correlate with big/concentrated/dense, things in wine are rarely equal. The Barolo levels suggest that tasting isn’t a reliable way to judge dry extract.

[Jeff_Vaughan]

John, I agree. I have no idea in terms of actual quantity or measurement, but it is a description of what I sense in the wine. I also use “minerality” in my tasting notes with some additional description. I know what I mean when I later read my notes, and that is why I write the notes in the first place. Others may not find them useful, but that is not my primary concern.

[John_Morris]

@Jeff Vaughan

John, I agree. I have no idea in terms of actual quantity or measurement, but it is a description of what I sense in the wine. I also use “minerality” in my tasting notes with some additional description. I know what I mean when I later read my notes, and that is why I write the notes in the first place. Others may not find them useful, but that is not my primary concern.

It would be better to say grippy, or tart or astringent – we know what those mean – than to appropriate a word that has a clear, objective meaning that may not apply in that particular case.

[Rob_Hansult]

In dry wine (since residual sugar is also measured as dry extract), dry extract is most closely related to a wines perceived viscosity, but can also modify impressions of body (mostly alcohol & tannins), & likely often show as intensity, everything else being equal.

[Scott_G_r_u_n_e_r]

sedimentary, my dear watson, sedimentary

[Jeff_Vaughan]

@John Morris

@Jeff Vaughan

John, I agree. I have no idea in terms of actual quantity or measurement, but it is a description of what I sense in the wine. I also use “minerality” in my tasting notes with some additional description. I know what I mean when I later read my notes, and that is why I write the notes in the first place. Others may not find them useful, but that is not my primary concern.

It would be better to say grippy, or tart or astringent – we know what those mean – than to appropriate a word that has a clear, objective meaning that may not apply in that particular case.

• 2010 Pierre-Yves Colin-Morey Corton-Charlemagne - France, Burgundy, Côte de Beaune, Corton-Charlemagne Grand Cru (8/11/2014)
  Intense, powerful, tart citrus, minerals, light oak and nutty notes. The texture has a little grip to it. Young. Very good now but I’d love to taste this in 5-10 years.

I do use “grip” sometimes. It depends on if I am trying to be sophisticated and knowledgeable.

[Ian_Sutton]

Geoff Kelly had a very interesting argument in favour of higher dry extracts for NZ wines. I’m not sure I’m convinced by the argument, but he is very good at putting interesting challenges forward, so they still remain interesting even if you don’t entirely buy it.

http://www.geoffkellywinereviews.co.nz/index.php?ArticleID=234

[Marc_Frontario]

it means, enjoy your amarone!