"Dana Myers" > wrote in message news:40965f8c$1@wobble...
> Obviously, we can't argue over what's actually in the glass, but
> I can't help but believe that once a flavor component is in a
> wine, it stays there unless it's somehow removed. If an ML
> fermentation produces diacetyl, then the flavor will be present.
> Perhaps it's the case that the lees are used to remove the diacetyl
> in a kind of fining?

According to my reading, diacetyl production and retention thereof in ML
fermentation is enhanced by (1) conducting the ML fermentation _after_ the
alcoholic fermentation, as opposed to concurrently, and (2) the absence of
yeast and ML lees during aging. Conversely of course, to permit ML to occur
while minimizing the production and retention of diacetyl one does the
opposite: ML fermentation simultaneously with the alcoholic fermentation,
and sur lie aging.

Perhaps also the specific Chardonnay clones
> that are used have an impact as well.

Apparently so - but in a less direct manner than I inferred from your
comment. Some clones of Chardonnay evidently tend to produce a higher ratio
of malic to tartaric acid than others. The Martini clone may run up to ~40%
malic (of the total acid present), whereas the Dijon clone may be only 10%
malic. Guess which one is capable of more profound butteriness? Of course
those numbers are approximate, and may well represent extremes between warm
climate Martini and cool climate Dijon clones, but you get the idea.

Tom S