A frequent customer posed an interesting question earlier today, when she asked for my opinion on the following story in last Saturday’s Montreal Gazette:
It’s a Question of Yeasts
…in case you didn’t follow the link, it’s an article about the growing use of “cultured” yeasts in “winemaking.”

Here’s what the Encyclopeadia Britannica has to say about Saccharomyces:
Genus of yeasts belonging to the family Saccharomycetaceae (phylum Ascomycota, kingdom Fungi). An outstanding characteristic of members of Saccharomyces is their ability to convert sugar into carbon dioxide and alcohol by means of enzymes. The yeasts used to ferment sugars in the manufacture of baked goods, beers, wines, distilled spirits, and industrial alcohols are all strains of one species, S. cerevisiae. One such yeast cell can ferment approximately its own weight of glucose, the simplest form of sugar, in one hour.
(http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9002436)

One of the many components of terroir, is the particular strain of yeast that thrives in a particular vineyard…which may be different than that in an adjacent vineyard. Terroir is not just about “soil.”

We tend (all things being equal) to prefer naturally produced wines that haven’t been sterilized and inoculated with “cultured” yeast. Granted, if you’re trying to produce industrial quantities of wine, using what are called “indigenous” yeasts isn’t practical – it’s much better to just “nuke” the juice, and introduce a “predictable” yeast.

This is why so many fake wines and garbage “Beaujolais” taste so similar.

Last year while having dinner at Ratcliffe in Charlotte, I ordered a bottle of Pinot Noir from Oregon – from a property whose wines I’d had (and liked!) in the past. It tasted like cherry cough syrup – very woody, cherry cough syrup.

So, I did a little investigating and found that the winery in question did, indeed, sterilize the juice from their beautiful, organically grown fruit, and introduced the following yeast strains: (76%) Assmanhausen, (19%) RC212, (5%) RA17…hmmm…nothin’ says “Burgundy style” quite like ‘em.

Turns out, this is the norm these days. These “cultured” yeasts provide “flavor profiles” that the wine press “likes” (just like kids like sugar), and the resulting wines garner “high ratings.”

Wines that are produced naturally teach us more about wine than manipulated wine “products.” They taste real, and they’re idiosyncratic, and smart people appreciate ‘em – this must be true, because we’ve only got smart customers, and they come back time and again, for the real McCoy.

So, ask me how I really feel about “cultured yeasts” in “winemaking.”

Posted by David Moore

The recent scandal in Brunello is still simmering, and now our “esteemed American wine ‘journalists’” find themselves having to explain why they couldn’t spot the frauds when they were busy “rating” the latest (suspect) releases.

Seems the suspected fraudulent Brunellos were those “rated most highly” by these nimnods, and now, rather than face the music for not knowing their behinds from holes in the ground, these idiots want to blame Sangiovese for not being “noble enough” on its own to achieve the coveted 90+ points that the “journalists” bestowed on the fakes.

This is not only hubris, this is scandalous in itself. To Mr. Suckling (and the others), I have this to say: “STOP WRITING ABOUT WINE AS IF IT WERE SOMETHING YOU HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF.”

The reason DOC and Appellation laws exist in Europe is because everyone knows that the manufacturers of large-production, “food-processed wine” and their distributors are prone to fudge the facts – after all, there’s money to be made.

Just like the old days when Bordeaux was (literally) the “new kid on the block” and pumped up much of its wine with Madiran and Cahors from further south, and when the négociants of Burgundy pumped up their Pinot with Syrah and Grenache from the Rhône, the addition of Cabernet and Merlot (both much easier to farm, and quicker to ripen than Sangiovese) to Brunello is FRAUD. It is unconscionable that these “journalists” who write about Italian wine without knowing anything about it would blame the “Real McCoy” for being what it’s supposed to be, rather than admit being wrong.

Further, their response will likely lead to a “changing of the rules” to allow for what is now considered fraud.

So Brunello in the future will likely taste like Napa Cab, thanks to these bozos, and Brunello will stop being the unique expression of a place and a culture. Just what we need, another anonymous, expensive red wine.

Posted by David Moore

I always go back to this quote from Greg:
“It comes down to this: we honor the terms of the implicit contract expected by consumers of wine: that the product is indeed the result of careful, sustainable agriculture, artisan craft and responsible handling.”

Now that’s what we’re talking about…wines, handmade, to the very highest levels of quality, by artisans who are truly qualified. Back in the days of European royalty (let’s exclude the current residents of Buckingham palace), such artisans were sought out by courtiers – buyers for the royal families, to guarantee the quality of goods sold to the royal households.

After the First War, with royalty largely out of fashion (and power…and money), the market for “luxury goods” were the new, rich industrialists – the few who could afford the work and raw materials that went into producing the goods. Again, the goods were produced by hand, by artisans. Artisan production houses like Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Prada, Chanel, etc., sold to a small group of people who were wealthy enough to afford their products. The attraction of these “luxury goods” was their limited availability, and high-quality.

These days, it’s probably a good idea to look beyond the luxury “brand,” and find out if the goods in question really ARE “indeed the result of careful…artisan craft.”

Newsweek writer, Dana Thomas just published a book called Deluxe: How Luxury Lost its Luster, in which she points out that most “luxury” clothing and handbag brands are now owned by multi-national, publicly-traded corporations. Along with this, she explains how the “luxury” products manufactured by these “brands” are now, largely, being produced in “developing nations,” NOT by craftsmen/women, but by assembly line workers who may (or may not) receive two weeks of training via video or through translation during a visit to the factory by an “old world craftsman.”

One particular company, the Valentino Fashion Group (brands include Hugo Boss, Valentino, M Missoni, Marlboro Classics, and Lebole) went from paying Italian clothing workers the equivalent of $18 dollars per hour to paying workers in Egypt the equivalent of 88 CENTS per hour to manufacture their “luxury brand” clothing (prices didn’t decrease to reflect the new efficiencies). What used to be rare, is now ubiquitous, and the quality has dropped dramatically.

I have no qualms with making a profit through one’s work. But if the work in question isn’t of the quality that’s promised by marketing, well then…what, “buyer beware?” Over the last 30-some years that I’ve been around wine, I’ve seen the same thing happen over and over: whenever production “ramps up,” and “brands” “diversify,” the quality goes to hell. The price NEVER goes down (except in the case of “2 Buck Chuck,” which, in any event, is honest about what it is), and the marketing and advertising would lead any consumer to believe that the products are still “the result of careful…artisan craft.”

Lest you worry that I’m an elitist, worried that it’s no longer possible to tell the hoi poloi from the well-heeled, that’s not my point. In fact, Moore Brothers Wine Company consistently proves that “luxury” need not be the exclusive prerogative of the wealthy – you can find outrageously good wine (all perfectly cared for, and in pristine condition) for less than $15 bucks a bottle, and it will be (unlike a more famous “luxury brand product”) “indeed the result of careful, sustainable agriculture, artisan craft and responsible handling.” And that’s a real luxury.

You can listen to Dana Thomas talking about her book and the “luxury” industry in this interview with Leonard Lopate from WNYC in New York:

Posted by David Moore