There are many different types of winemakers. Some make wine under their own name and are something of a one-man or one-woman show. Some have their own brand, but also consult for a few other wineries. Some our winemakers for hire and consult at one or many wineries. Regardless of who writes their check (or how big those checks may be), most winemakers love what they do and are passionate about wine. A few weeks ago, I sat down with a man who does all of the above.
From humbling beginnings in Saint-Émilion, Stéphane Derenoncourt made a name for himself in the 1990s and has since become a globally renowned winemaker that makes wine for more than 60 wineries (including two of his own) in a dozen different countries. He, along with Michel Rolland, is often referred to as a "flying winemaker." I met with Derenoncourt during my weekend in California for Premiere Napa Valley. I interviewed him for Decanter and we also tasted through the 2009 lineup of his Derenoncourt California wines.
A website devoted to Colorado Wine and beyond.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
A Good Wine Seldom Mentioned Is Soon Forgotten
As I begin to read Doug Shafer's A Vineyard in Napa, a motto he attributes to his father, John, and founder of the renowned Shafer Vineyards made me think of the current debate about the state of wine criticism. "A good wine seldom mentioned is soon forgotten." To me, this maxim speaks volumes to me about how both we as writers/critics and consumers talk about wine.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Wine Should Be Dynamic
Yesterday, I mentioned that consumers want dynamic wines. On face value, that is wrong. Many consumers want the cheapest wine they can get. They want to drink the same boring wine night in and night out. After all, jug wine and cheap boxed wine (there is some good boxed wine...) make up the majority of Americans' wine purchases. When I refer to dynamic wine, I'm talking about wines that cost more than seven dollars a bottle. I am talking about people that talk about wine.
Dynamic wine doesn't have to mean the absolute best damn wine in the world. It just means a wine that evokes emotions. It means wines that change the way we think about wine. One of my favorite wines is a six-dollar Vino de la Tierra de Castilla, Casa Solar. When I was in college, my wife-to-be and I drank a case of it when we were wet behind the ears. It was the red wine we served at our wedding. Will it knock your socks off? No. But it means something to me. It evokes thought and emotion. It makes me think about life. It makes me think about my continued journey through the wine world. Pretty impressive for a low-80 point wine. Will it be dynamic for you? Probably not. Sadly, I haven't had a bottle for a few years, but just thinking about it makes me smile.
Dynamic also means wines speak differently to different people. I've had many wines that someone has rated a "perfect" 100-points. Some I've like, some I've really disliked. One man's treasure is an other's trash. I can say I've never had a perfect wine. I don't think such a thing exists. It almost makes me sad to think that people think wine can be perfect. Wine can be pretty damn near perfect, but just like infinity it can never be reached.
Dynamic also means a wine that changes. It can change in the glass. It can change in the bottle. It can change your perception of wine. It can change your mind. Good wines from places off the beaten path excite me. Wines and people that try to change the wine world are dynamic. One of the problems with the wine world is that so many people try to make wine static. By assigning scores to wine, they etch in stone a quantitative, and subjective value of a wine. Sure, they say there are footnotes in their publications that say a score is only what one person thought about a wine on a given day, but we all know that is not how a score is used in the real world. Scores are written on the foreheads of wines with permanent ink.
I am put off by scores because they pretend to be permanent. Rarely do you see a critic change his or her score by more than a point or two. Critics pretend to be infallible. If they admit they were wrong, why would consumers listen to what they have to say? The people who hand out triple-digit scores want to solidify their influence. They want their voices to be permanent. Nothing about wine is permanent. Not the color, not the aroma and not the flavors. Not the wineries and not even the pundits. But I hope that the discussion and the global conversation that is fervently heating up will be permanent. When you and I are long gone, I hope people are still talking about wine with as much passion as I like to think I am.
Dynamic wine doesn't have to mean the absolute best damn wine in the world. It just means a wine that evokes emotions. It means wines that change the way we think about wine. One of my favorite wines is a six-dollar Vino de la Tierra de Castilla, Casa Solar. When I was in college, my wife-to-be and I drank a case of it when we were wet behind the ears. It was the red wine we served at our wedding. Will it knock your socks off? No. But it means something to me. It evokes thought and emotion. It makes me think about life. It makes me think about my continued journey through the wine world. Pretty impressive for a low-80 point wine. Will it be dynamic for you? Probably not. Sadly, I haven't had a bottle for a few years, but just thinking about it makes me smile.
Dynamic also means wines speak differently to different people. I've had many wines that someone has rated a "perfect" 100-points. Some I've like, some I've really disliked. One man's treasure is an other's trash. I can say I've never had a perfect wine. I don't think such a thing exists. It almost makes me sad to think that people think wine can be perfect. Wine can be pretty damn near perfect, but just like infinity it can never be reached.
Dynamic also means a wine that changes. It can change in the glass. It can change in the bottle. It can change your perception of wine. It can change your mind. Good wines from places off the beaten path excite me. Wines and people that try to change the wine world are dynamic. One of the problems with the wine world is that so many people try to make wine static. By assigning scores to wine, they etch in stone a quantitative, and subjective value of a wine. Sure, they say there are footnotes in their publications that say a score is only what one person thought about a wine on a given day, but we all know that is not how a score is used in the real world. Scores are written on the foreheads of wines with permanent ink.
I am put off by scores because they pretend to be permanent. Rarely do you see a critic change his or her score by more than a point or two. Critics pretend to be infallible. If they admit they were wrong, why would consumers listen to what they have to say? The people who hand out triple-digit scores want to solidify their influence. They want their voices to be permanent. Nothing about wine is permanent. Not the color, not the aroma and not the flavors. Not the wineries and not even the pundits. But I hope that the discussion and the global conversation that is fervently heating up will be permanent. When you and I are long gone, I hope people are still talking about wine with as much passion as I like to think I am.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
The Wine World is Changing and Some Wine Writers ARE Losing It (Influence, that is...)
One of the favorite discussion items in the wine industry of late revolves around changes in wine criticism. Some recognize changes and others hold on to the belief that wine writing is a static enterprise. In the past few years, the rise of wine bloggers has caused traditional writers to get a bit defensive. This rise in the democratization of information is upsetting the critical dictators. Those in the ivory towers continue to say that wine criticism and the traditional media in which it has been conveyed is stronger than ever. Those that say otherwise are attacked as losing their minds. Regardless of the ridiculous amount of navel gazing going on, the short and skinny of it is simple: yes, the wine industry is changing and the role of wine criticism is a big part of that change. To say otherwise is to proclaim your stubbornness (or ignorance).
Friday, March 1, 2013
Restaurants need to get with the program
Restaurants in Colorado are missing the boat when it comes to being innovative and genuine with their wine lists. There are just over 100 wineries in the state, yet I can only think of a handful of wineries that appear on restaurant wine lists in the Denver area. Sure, some of the fault lies with the wineries. Many think they are too small to appear on a restaurant list and some just don't want to sell to restaurants. That's fine and good, but it is also a short-sighted perspective. Restaurants can and should be a vital partner in a wine industry.
When I was in Napa last week, the Napa Valley Vintners worked with 10 area restaurants to promote by-the-glass lists with only Napa Valley wine for Premiere week. Now, Napa has more than four times as many wineries and many orders of magnitude more acres of vineyards than Colorado so it is easier for restaurants to find local wines they want to place on their lists. I bring up the Napa comparison only because we are in the middle of Denver Restaurant Week (Feb. 23 - Mar. 8). I've eaten at two different restaurants and have been disappointed in the wine selections at each. Both wine specials at each restaurant were the exact same Gallo-owned brands. Sure, sponsorship for events such as Restaurant Week are important, but when a restaurant is trying to be innovative with its food, why not its wine? I only found one Colorado selection on their regular wines lists. Which leads me to my next point.
So many Colorado restaurants tout themselves are being farm-to-table or supporting local farmers. Yet, few have more than a token local wine on the list if any at all. Local beers and spirits appear on lists with much more frequency than local wines. Part of this has to do with the brewers and distillers being located along the front range whereas the wineries are much more spread out throughout the state and being more active promoters of their products. But a good deal of it has to do with restaurants being lazy. They only look the through catalogs that their beverage distributors bring them. Very few Colorado wineries actually have third-party distributors, but instead self-distribute their product.Yes, those wineries need to be more proactive in approaching select restaurants, but restaurants also need to show their support for local vintners by visiting the wineries and vineyards, too. Chefs are eager to find local greens and meats, but wine is often forgotten.
Now, I'm not advocating that any restaurant have a 100% Colorado wine list. But restaurants hold some responsibility in offering more than same five Colorado wineries. I should note that a few restaurants in the Grand Valley do a much better job of listing Colorado wine, but like it or not Denver and the mountain resort towns are the markets that matters most. The very knowledgeable Colorado consumers want to see that some thought went into the design of a wine list and not just wines that are easily available at the local liquor store, but with a 300% markup. Restaurants in other wine regions get this, why don't Colorado restaurants?
When I was in Napa last week, the Napa Valley Vintners worked with 10 area restaurants to promote by-the-glass lists with only Napa Valley wine for Premiere week. Now, Napa has more than four times as many wineries and many orders of magnitude more acres of vineyards than Colorado so it is easier for restaurants to find local wines they want to place on their lists. I bring up the Napa comparison only because we are in the middle of Denver Restaurant Week (Feb. 23 - Mar. 8). I've eaten at two different restaurants and have been disappointed in the wine selections at each. Both wine specials at each restaurant were the exact same Gallo-owned brands. Sure, sponsorship for events such as Restaurant Week are important, but when a restaurant is trying to be innovative with its food, why not its wine? I only found one Colorado selection on their regular wines lists. Which leads me to my next point.
So many Colorado restaurants tout themselves are being farm-to-table or supporting local farmers. Yet, few have more than a token local wine on the list if any at all. Local beers and spirits appear on lists with much more frequency than local wines. Part of this has to do with the brewers and distillers being located along the front range whereas the wineries are much more spread out throughout the state and being more active promoters of their products. But a good deal of it has to do with restaurants being lazy. They only look the through catalogs that their beverage distributors bring them. Very few Colorado wineries actually have third-party distributors, but instead self-distribute their product.Yes, those wineries need to be more proactive in approaching select restaurants, but restaurants also need to show their support for local vintners by visiting the wineries and vineyards, too. Chefs are eager to find local greens and meats, but wine is often forgotten.
Now, I'm not advocating that any restaurant have a 100% Colorado wine list. But restaurants hold some responsibility in offering more than same five Colorado wineries. I should note that a few restaurants in the Grand Valley do a much better job of listing Colorado wine, but like it or not Denver and the mountain resort towns are the markets that matters most. The very knowledgeable Colorado consumers want to see that some thought went into the design of a wine list and not just wines that are easily available at the local liquor store, but with a 300% markup. Restaurants in other wine regions get this, why don't Colorado restaurants?
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Building relationships takes effort
The events surrounding Premiere Napa Valley were quite impressive. The Napa Valley Vintners and individual AVA associations know how to throw a party. The whole PNV week is basically a big party celebrating all things Napa. It doesn't hurt that NVV has a multi-million dollar budget to work with and they were wooing the world's top wine media (present company excluded) and trade members itching to spend tens of thousands of dollars, but that shouldn't stop emerging regions like Colorado from learning how to host similarly successful events.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Six Further Thoughts on Premiere Napa Valley
I want to write about a few specific thoughts on Premiere Napa Valley in a bit more detail than my initial post.
1. Vintage matters. Tasting through a dozen producers' 2008, 2009 and 2010 cabernet sauvignon during the Vintage Perspective Tasting made this abundantly clear. After tasting 36 wines with only knowing the vintage, variety and that they were from Napa Valley, I concluded that 2008 is a great vintage. For almost every producer, I preferred the 2008 to the 2009 or 2010. Of the three vintages, 2008 had earliest bud break, a long, dry, hot growing season and the longest harvest period. Both 2009 and 2010 were cooler and wetter vintages. The 2008 wines were collectively the most complex and balanced wines in the room. The best offered a wonderful array of intense fruit, floral and earthy aromas and flavors complemented by smooth tannins. Wines from 2009 were a bit more varied in quality, and were generally lighter and with more floral characteristics. A few were unfortunately under-ripe, and the acidity was quite noticeable. The even cooler, shorter and wetter 2010 season was quite apparent in the wines as well. Most 2010s were marred with green tobacco aromas and rough tannins. Despite being greener, the 2010s still managed a bit bigger structure than the 2009s and few that achieved ripeness approached the 2008s in quality. The auction wines were mostly from the 2011 vintage which was even shorter, cooler and wetter than 2010. I think the detailed selection process that went into these unique wines may have provided a skewed view into the vintage as a whole, but many were thin and green. Others that managed to achieve proper ripeness were stellar, but many still were lacking much depth and hidden by massive tannins. For my favorites, see Tuesday's post.
2. Location matters. With the Premiere lot wines being mostly from the difficult, cool 2011 vintage, vineyard location was quite important. For me, wines from hills above the valley floor fared the best. The extra sun and lack of fog proved to be beneficial in this challenging year. From the variety of hillside locations, wines from Pritchard Hill were among the best. Both the Continuum and BRAND 2011s were two of my favorite wines the entire weekend. Other wines with Pritchard Hill grapes (Chappellet, Gandona, Krupp Brothers, Larkin, Montagna, Moone-Tsai and Purlieu) were nearly as wonderful. Howell Mountain (O'Shaughnessy and Derenoncourt California) and the hillside vineyards just south of Pritchard Hill (Oakville East Exposure) also yielded some of the better wines. Superior benchland sites on the west side of the valley (Vine Hill Ranch in Oakville and Corison's Kronos Vineyard in St. Helena) also made some exceptional wine. The best locations proved to make the best wines. Not really surprising when you think about it.
3. Winemaker matters. So many vintners will say that wine is made in the vineyard, but a masterful winemaker can really take great grapes and make exceptional wine. Bidders at the auction really were focused on name recognition. Philippe Melka had his name attached to more lots than any other winemaker and combined his 55 cases sold for $225,000, or just over $340 per bottle on average (Gandona at $28k, Vineyard 29 at $27k, BRAND at $26k, Gemstone at $26k, Roy Estate at $24k, Cliff Lede at $20k, Adamvs at $20k, Lail at $19K, Entre Nous at $18k and Moone-Tsai at $17k). I guess that is why he is the hottest name in California winemaking right now. Not only was name recognition important, but perhaps the most elegant, and my personal favorite, lot was made by a winemaker that is known doing more with cool vintages. Cathy Corison makes what many call a throwback style of Napa cabernet due to her lower alcohol, gentle extraction and delicate use of oak. While her wines are almost always very good, her wines' finesse and elegance are at their peak in challenging vintages such as 2011. I was wish I had an extra $15,000 laying around so I could have outbid the Houston company that was successful with a mere $14,000 bid.
4. The new kid on the block is ready to play ball. Thumbing through the catalog I was surprised to see so many wines list Coombsville AVA as a source for their grapes. I quickly counted at least 16 different wines with Coombsville fruit. That's pretty amazing given that Coombsville has only been an AVA for only about a year. Fruit from this small region just east of the town of Napa has been going into big name wines for years, but now this area is ready to take its rightful place as one of the premier districts in California. One of my favorite wines, though not an auction wine, was the interestingly named Inherit the Sheep. I'll definitely be looking into adding some of that to my cellar. Key an eye out for labels with Coombsville on them. Oh, and I much prefer the name Coombsville to the original name of Tulocay AVA; it just rolls of the tongue much more easily.
5. Cabernet Sauvignon may be King, but... Franc is the Knight in Shining Armor and a few other varieties excel in Napa. Many of the wines that I found most appealing had a heavy dose of cabernet franc. I think 100% cabernet sauvignon is often boring and greatly benefits from some blending with other varieties. BRAND (~50% cab franc) and Continuum (~30% cab franc) provide powerful evidence that more cab franc in the blend is a good thing. Oakville East Exposure's and Detert's 100% cabernet francs were also some of the standouts. And in a bit of a twist, O'Shaughnessy's 100% petit verdot was killer juice. Very rarely do you see varietal wines from petit verdot. Maybe next year they'll make a varietal St. Macaire! There were also a few random white wines in the lineup and Arietta's blend of 65% semillon and 35% sauvignon blanc stood out as a refreshing alternative to all the massive cabernet sauvignon based wines.
6. Winemakers and winery owners are real people. Sure, they may be rock stars in this little industry, but they are people just like you and me. They watched anxiously as people tasted their wines and were sincerely gracious when complemented on their product. I stood in the back of the room for much of the auction watching nervous vintners anxiously hold their breath when their wines were up for sale only to let out a sigh of relief when the bidding was over. I sat next to Tim Mondavi for about an hour and we chatted like he didn't have one of the biggest names in the wine world. At no time did I feel like the peon I am in the wine world. Sure, there is a lot of money and big egos in Napa, but isn't there everywhere? Most of the vintners I met were real, sincere people like you and I (except for you, and you know who you are...). I am already looking forward to next year (assuming I'm invited back) and working on convincing my wife to accompany me.
1. Vintage matters. Tasting through a dozen producers' 2008, 2009 and 2010 cabernet sauvignon during the Vintage Perspective Tasting made this abundantly clear. After tasting 36 wines with only knowing the vintage, variety and that they were from Napa Valley, I concluded that 2008 is a great vintage. For almost every producer, I preferred the 2008 to the 2009 or 2010. Of the three vintages, 2008 had earliest bud break, a long, dry, hot growing season and the longest harvest period. Both 2009 and 2010 were cooler and wetter vintages. The 2008 wines were collectively the most complex and balanced wines in the room. The best offered a wonderful array of intense fruit, floral and earthy aromas and flavors complemented by smooth tannins. Wines from 2009 were a bit more varied in quality, and were generally lighter and with more floral characteristics. A few were unfortunately under-ripe, and the acidity was quite noticeable. The even cooler, shorter and wetter 2010 season was quite apparent in the wines as well. Most 2010s were marred with green tobacco aromas and rough tannins. Despite being greener, the 2010s still managed a bit bigger structure than the 2009s and few that achieved ripeness approached the 2008s in quality. The auction wines were mostly from the 2011 vintage which was even shorter, cooler and wetter than 2010. I think the detailed selection process that went into these unique wines may have provided a skewed view into the vintage as a whole, but many were thin and green. Others that managed to achieve proper ripeness were stellar, but many still were lacking much depth and hidden by massive tannins. For my favorites, see Tuesday's post.
2. Location matters. With the Premiere lot wines being mostly from the difficult, cool 2011 vintage, vineyard location was quite important. For me, wines from hills above the valley floor fared the best. The extra sun and lack of fog proved to be beneficial in this challenging year. From the variety of hillside locations, wines from Pritchard Hill were among the best. Both the Continuum and BRAND 2011s were two of my favorite wines the entire weekend. Other wines with Pritchard Hill grapes (Chappellet, Gandona, Krupp Brothers, Larkin, Montagna, Moone-Tsai and Purlieu) were nearly as wonderful. Howell Mountain (O'Shaughnessy and Derenoncourt California) and the hillside vineyards just south of Pritchard Hill (Oakville East Exposure) also yielded some of the better wines. Superior benchland sites on the west side of the valley (Vine Hill Ranch in Oakville and Corison's Kronos Vineyard in St. Helena) also made some exceptional wine. The best locations proved to make the best wines. Not really surprising when you think about it.
3. Winemaker matters. So many vintners will say that wine is made in the vineyard, but a masterful winemaker can really take great grapes and make exceptional wine. Bidders at the auction really were focused on name recognition. Philippe Melka had his name attached to more lots than any other winemaker and combined his 55 cases sold for $225,000, or just over $340 per bottle on average (Gandona at $28k, Vineyard 29 at $27k, BRAND at $26k, Gemstone at $26k, Roy Estate at $24k, Cliff Lede at $20k, Adamvs at $20k, Lail at $19K, Entre Nous at $18k and Moone-Tsai at $17k). I guess that is why he is the hottest name in California winemaking right now. Not only was name recognition important, but perhaps the most elegant, and my personal favorite, lot was made by a winemaker that is known doing more with cool vintages. Cathy Corison makes what many call a throwback style of Napa cabernet due to her lower alcohol, gentle extraction and delicate use of oak. While her wines are almost always very good, her wines' finesse and elegance are at their peak in challenging vintages such as 2011. I was wish I had an extra $15,000 laying around so I could have outbid the Houston company that was successful with a mere $14,000 bid.
4. The new kid on the block is ready to play ball. Thumbing through the catalog I was surprised to see so many wines list Coombsville AVA as a source for their grapes. I quickly counted at least 16 different wines with Coombsville fruit. That's pretty amazing given that Coombsville has only been an AVA for only about a year. Fruit from this small region just east of the town of Napa has been going into big name wines for years, but now this area is ready to take its rightful place as one of the premier districts in California. One of my favorite wines, though not an auction wine, was the interestingly named Inherit the Sheep. I'll definitely be looking into adding some of that to my cellar. Key an eye out for labels with Coombsville on them. Oh, and I much prefer the name Coombsville to the original name of Tulocay AVA; it just rolls of the tongue much more easily.
5. Cabernet Sauvignon may be King, but... Franc is the Knight in Shining Armor and a few other varieties excel in Napa. Many of the wines that I found most appealing had a heavy dose of cabernet franc. I think 100% cabernet sauvignon is often boring and greatly benefits from some blending with other varieties. BRAND (~50% cab franc) and Continuum (~30% cab franc) provide powerful evidence that more cab franc in the blend is a good thing. Oakville East Exposure's and Detert's 100% cabernet francs were also some of the standouts. And in a bit of a twist, O'Shaughnessy's 100% petit verdot was killer juice. Very rarely do you see varietal wines from petit verdot. Maybe next year they'll make a varietal St. Macaire! There were also a few random white wines in the lineup and Arietta's blend of 65% semillon and 35% sauvignon blanc stood out as a refreshing alternative to all the massive cabernet sauvignon based wines.
6. Winemakers and winery owners are real people. Sure, they may be rock stars in this little industry, but they are people just like you and me. They watched anxiously as people tasted their wines and were sincerely gracious when complemented on their product. I stood in the back of the room for much of the auction watching nervous vintners anxiously hold their breath when their wines were up for sale only to let out a sigh of relief when the bidding was over. I sat next to Tim Mondavi for about an hour and we chatted like he didn't have one of the biggest names in the wine world. At no time did I feel like the peon I am in the wine world. Sure, there is a lot of money and big egos in Napa, but isn't there everywhere? Most of the vintners I met were real, sincere people like you and I (except for you, and you know who you are...). I am already looking forward to next year (assuming I'm invited back) and working on convincing my wife to accompany me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
