Recently had a bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, which was described on its
label as being "made from only free run juice."

I've heard of free range chicken but have never heard this type of term
applied to wine. Does this mean anything or is it just marketing overkill?

Bupkis wrote:
> Recently had a bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, which was described on its
> label as being "made from only free run juice."
>
> I've heard of free range chicken but have never heard this type of term
> applied to wine. Does this mean anything or is it just marketing overkill?

It's a real term. Free run juice means exactly that: it's juice that
runs freely from the grapes prior to crushing them. (What's going on is
that the weight of grapes on top of them is enough to crush them without
any other force being applied) Why is it important? Crusing grapes
mechanically can lead to crushing the seeds and squeezing juice out of
the skins, both of which contribute tannins to the wine. The term is
most frequently used, though, in the production of sweet wines, where
the free run juice is higher in sugars than the rest of the juice. Was
your Sauvignon Blanc sweet by any chance?

Mark Lipton

--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

I'll disagree just slightly with the esteemed Mr. Mark (whose opinion
I seek out diligently on this forum - so I stand willing to be
scolded). 'Free run' is most often (IMHO) used as a qualitative
descriptor with red wines. As Mark pointed out, when wine is pressed,
many of the tannin carrying organic compounds are pressed out of the
skins. 'Free run' wine is, in some opinions, softer and more
desirable. In my own winemaking experience, this is really a big "it
depends". Some wines are preferable with more tannins (big reds in
which the winemaker desires aging) whereas some (for instance, some of
those softer Aussie reds these days) are intended to be consumed young.

Some - myself included - are slightly skeptical of the nuance here.
Much more impactful to the tannin content of the wine are things like
delestage (taking the cap off of fermenting red wine, pumping over the
wine, and leaving behind the more tannic seeds and jack stems - making
the wine LESS tannic), or inclusion of stems in the vat (making the
wine MORE tannic). Assuming that the caps are punched down regularly,
there is little difference in tannin content between the 'free run'
and the press juice.

With white wines the skins are not fermented nor are they in contact
with the grape juice for any length of time after crushing. The
incremental tannin production of pressing is modest, especailly given
that the skins of white wine grapes have relatively much less tannins
to begin with. If you really want to play with tannins in a white wine
- leave the jack stems in the fermentation vat. You'll get quite a
different wine.

Personally, if I saw that on a label of a white wine, I'd consider it
marketing hype.



In article > Mark Lipton >
wrote:
> Bupkis wrote:
>> Recently had a bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, which was described on
>> its label as being "made from only free run juice."
>>
>> I've heard of free range chicken but have never heard this type of
>> term applied to wine. Does this mean anything or is it just
>> marketing overkill?

> It's a real term. Free run juice means exactly that: it's juice
> that runs freely from the grapes prior to crushing them. (What's
> going on is that the weight of grapes on top of them is enough to
> crush them without any other force being applied) Why is it
> important? Crusing grapes mechanically can lead to crushing the
> seeds and squeezing juice out of the skins, both of which contribute
> tannins to the wine. The term is most frequently used, though, in
> the production of sweet wines, where the free run juice is higher in
> sugars than the rest of the juice. Wasyour Sauvignon Blanc sweet by
> any chance?

> Mark Lipton

--
I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 115 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

AxisOfBeagles wrote:
> I'll disagree just slightly with the esteemed Mr. Mark (whose opinion
> I seek out diligently on this forum - so I stand willing to be
> scolded). 'Free run' is most often (IMHO) used as a qualitative
> descriptor with red wines.

Really? I can't recall seeing it used on a red wine, but perhaps I just
travel in the wrong circles ;-) When I think of wines designated "free
run" I think of Tokaji Eszensia and Huet's 1er Trie Vouvrays.

> Some - myself included - are slightly skeptical of the nuance here.
> Much more impactful to the tannin content of the wine are things like
> delestage (taking the cap off of fermenting red wine, pumping over the
> wine, and leaving behind the more tannic seeds and jack stems - making
> the wine LESS tannic), or inclusion of stems in the vat (making the
> wine MORE tannic). Assuming that the caps are punched down regularly,
> there is little difference in tannin content between the 'free run'
> and the press juice.

Indeed, it makes little to no sense with a red wine, since fermentation
is conducted in the presence of the skins and pneumatic presses can
avoid crushing any seeds. What could possibly be gained from using free
run juice in a red wine if you're keeping the skins around during
fermentation anyway?


> Personally, if I saw that on a label of a white wine, I'd consider it
> marketing hype.

Can't argue with that. That's why I asked about the sweetness.

Mark Lipton
--
alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

Mark Lipton > wrote:

>> I'll disagree just slightly with the esteemed Mr. Mark (whose
>> opinion I seek out diligently on this forum - so I stand
>> willing to be scolded). 'Free run' is most often (IMHO) used as
>> a qualitative descriptor with red wines.

> Really? I can't recall seeing it used on a red wine, but
> perhaps I just travel in the wrong circles ;-)

Maybe he speaks of what the French call "saignée"?

>> Personally, if I saw that on a label of a white wine, I'd
>> consider it marketing hype.

> Can't argue with that. That's why I asked about the sweetness.

"Free run juice" definitely is a nonsense in dry white wines. Only
very, very little juice runs freely. Winemakers want to have whole
berries coming in, not cracked or busted ones which leads to a
possibility of unwanted oxidation.

M.

Mark, I do know that in the case of BV George Latour Cabernet they claim
that the Georges is the Free Run Juice only. That BV Napa and Rutherford
bottlings are crushed. They tell you that at the tasting room.

Also I know a few wineries...that have 2 labels, a single vineyard or
reserve where the reserve is free run but the standard bottling is not.
Example, Sawyer Cellars and Reverie.

I guess I have traveled the right circle at least once.


"Mark Lipton" > wrote in message
...
> AxisOfBeagles wrote:
>> I'll disagree just slightly with the esteemed Mr. Mark (whose opinion
>> I seek out diligently on this forum - so I stand willing to be
>> scolded). 'Free run' is most often (IMHO) used as a qualitative
>> descriptor with red wines.
>
> Really? I can't recall seeing it used on a red wine, but perhaps I just
> travel in the wrong circles ;-) When I think of wines designated "free
> run" I think of Tokaji Eszensia and Huet's 1er Trie Vouvrays.
>
>> Some - myself included - are slightly skeptical of the nuance here.
>> Much more impactful to the tannin content of the wine are things like
>> delestage (taking the cap off of fermenting red wine, pumping over the
>> wine, and leaving behind the more tannic seeds and jack stems - making
>> the wine LESS tannic), or inclusion of stems in the vat (making the
>> wine MORE tannic). Assuming that the caps are punched down regularly,
>> there is little difference in tannin content between the 'free run'
>> and the press juice.
>
> Indeed, it makes little to no sense with a red wine, since fermentation
> is conducted in the presence of the skins and pneumatic presses can
> avoid crushing any seeds. What could possibly be gained from using free
> run juice in a red wine if you're keeping the skins around during
> fermentation anyway?
>
>
>> Personally, if I saw that on a label of a white wine, I'd consider it
>> marketing hype.
>
> Can't argue with that. That's why I asked about the sweetness.
>
> Mark Lipton
> --
> alt.food.wine FAQ: http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:

> Mark, I do know that in the case of BV George Latour Cabernet
> they claim that the Georges is the Free Run Juice only. That BV
> Napa and Rutherford bottlings are crushed. They tell you that
> at the tasting room.

Sorry, but that's utter nonsense. You simply cannot make red wine
without crushing the grapes. Red colour comes from the skin of the
berries, so pre-crush free run juice from red grapes is white.

M.

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:14:25 GMT, Bupkis > wrote:

>Recently had a bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, which was described on its
>label as being "made from only free run juice."
>
>I've heard of free range chicken but have never heard this type of term
>applied to wine. Does this mean anything or is it just marketing overkill?

Free run is a real term, but from a quick reading of the replies here
so far, I don't think it has been explained correctly yet. It is
simply the juice you get without pressing.

If you are talking about white wine the grape will have to be CRUSHED,
i.e. have their skins broken, to get this juice. But no pressure will
be applied, which is what is involved in PRESSING.

For red wine, it is what freely runs out of the fermentation vat. Then
all the stuff that is left would be pressed, and at least some of the
press juice woudl be added back to the free run juice.

In both cases you would tend to avoid, for better or for worse, the
more tannic and bitter bits by only using free run juiice.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:38:57 +0100
Steve Slatcher > wrote:

> For red wine, it is what freely runs out of the fermentation vat. Then
> all the stuff that is left would be pressed, and at least some of the
> press juice woudl be added back to the free run juice.

So what we come to is "free run juice" is just "vin de goutte", and the
other is "vin de presse." Much ado about nothing, in other words, since
many makers don't include the vin de presse in the top cuvées. And
in all cases the addition of vin de presse must be handled with care.

By "all the stuff" I take it Steve is referring to what floats to the top
of the fermentation vat, the marc in french. (See recent thread on grappa).

-E
--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies
Questions about wine? Visit http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:17:09 +0200, Emery Davis
> wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:38:57 +0100
>Steve Slatcher > wrote:
>
>> For red wine, it is what freely runs out of the fermentation vat. Then
>> all the stuff that is left would be pressed, and at least some of the
>> press juice woudl be added back to the free run juice.
>
>So what we come to is "free run juice" is just "vin de goutte", and the
>other is "vin de presse." Much ado about nothing, in other words, since
>many makers don't include the vin de presse in the top cuvées. And
>in all cases the addition of vin de presse must be handled with care.

I don't know the French terms. Do they apply to both red and white?

For white wines most winemakers, even for their top wines, would press
wouldn't they? But of course modern presses can be controlled to be
very gentle anyway.

>By "all the stuff" I take it Steve is referring to what floats to the top
>of the fermentation vat, the marc in french. (See recent thread on grappa).

Apart from wondering whether it all finishes up at the top or not
(after the liquid has been drawn off the point is moot anyway!), yes
it the marc.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

Live and learn. Thanks to Mark and all who added their thoughts.

I see this a bit wasteful though. Pressing is pressing whether done
mechanically or by other the weight of other grapes. I expect that the
grapes at the top of the pile would be least pressed, if at all. Would
the grapes be stirred/mixed to equalize the pressing or would they be
further pressed to produce a different wine?

Also, while the wine was moderately sweet, it certainly was not as sweet
as a Tokaji or a dessert wine.

Mark Lipton wrote:
> AxisOfBeagles wrote:
>> I'll disagree just slightly with the esteemed Mr. Mark (whose opinion
>> I seek out diligently on this forum - so I stand willing to be
>> scolded). 'Free run' is most often (IMHO) used as a qualitative
>> descriptor with red wines.
>
> Really? I can't recall seeing it used on a red wine, but perhaps I just
> travel in the wrong circles ;-) When I think of wines designated "free
> run" I think of Tokaji Eszensia and Huet's 1er Trie Vouvrays.
>
>> Some - myself included - are slightly skeptical of the nuance here.
>> Much more impactful to the tannin content of the wine are things like
>> delestage (taking the cap off of fermenting red wine, pumping over the
>> wine, and leaving behind the more tannic seeds and jack stems - making
>> the wine LESS tannic), or inclusion of stems in the vat (making the
>> wine MORE tannic). Assuming that the caps are punched down regularly,
>> there is little difference in tannin content between the 'free run'
>> and the press juice.
>
> Indeed, it makes little to no sense with a red wine, since fermentation
> is conducted in the presence of the skins and pneumatic presses can
> avoid crushing any seeds. What could possibly be gained from using free
> run juice in a red wine if you're keeping the skins around during
> fermentation anyway?
>
>
>> Personally, if I saw that on a label of a white wine, I'd consider it
>> marketing hype.
>
> Can't argue with that. That's why I asked about the sweetness.
>
> Mark Lipton

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:21:45 +0100
Steve Slatcher > wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:17:09 +0200, Emery Davis
> > wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:38:57 +0100
> >Steve Slatcher > wrote:
> >
> >> For red wine, it is what freely runs out of the fermentation vat. Then
> >> all the stuff that is left would be pressed, and at least some of the
> >> press juice woudl be added back to the free run juice.
> >
> >So what we come to is "free run juice" is just "vin de goutte", and the
> >other is "vin de presse." Much ado about nothing, in other words, since
> >many makers don't include the vin de presse in the top cuvées. And
> >in all cases the addition of vin de presse must be handled with care.
>
> I don't know the French terms. Do they apply to both red and white?
>

Well, red I guess. As Michael points out the white has to be separated from
the skins first. I don't think the remainder at the top of the fermentation vat
would be pressed.

> For white wines most winemakers, even for their top wines, would press
> wouldn't they? But of course modern presses can be controlled to be
> very gentle anyway.
>

Yes, indeed. But that's pre-fermentation. Otherwise, you'd be making
red wine, as Michael again points out.

> >By "all the stuff" I take it Steve is referring to what floats to the top
> >of the fermentation vat, the marc in french. (See recent thread on grappa).
>
> Apart from wondering whether it all finishes up at the top or not
> (after the liquid has been drawn off the point is moot anyway!), yes
> it the marc.
>

The marc does go to the top, the goutte can be drawn off the bottom
for unfiltered wine with remarkably little junk in it.

-E

--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies
Questions about wine? Visit http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 03:07:06 GMT, AxisOfBeagles >
wrote:

>the skins of white wine grapes have relatively much less tannins
>to begin with.

I have read elsewhere online somewhere that the opposite is true -
white grape skins are very tannic and that is one of the reasons they
are removed from the winemaking process at an early stage. Certainly
white wines that have a little skin maceration, e.g. White Musar, can
be noticeably astringent.

I would be very intersested if you could supply more information as
I'd like to get to the bottom of this issue.

--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

Michael, I hear you but that is what they said.

Is it possible "Free Run" means something different to different people?

They were very specific to mention that on a tour there. It was like if the
juice that initially comes from grapes using a baloon in the pressing
machine is different than all the remaining from a crush. The initial flow
is what they claimed to use for their best bottling. They refered to that
as the free run juice.

Then the remaining was "pressed"

Probably marketing hype but that was said at 2-3 wineries.


"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> "Richard Neidich" > wrote:
>
>> Mark, I do know that in the case of BV George Latour Cabernet
>> they claim that the Georges is the Free Run Juice only. That BV
>> Napa and Rutherford bottlings are crushed. They tell you that
>> at the tasting room.
>
> Sorry, but that's utter nonsense. You simply cannot make red wine
> without crushing the grapes. Red colour comes from the skin of the
> berries, so pre-crush free run juice from red grapes is white.
>
> M.

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:

>>> Mark, I do know that in the case of BV George Latour Cabernet
>>> they claim that the Georges is the Free Run Juice only. That
>>> BV Napa and Rutherford bottlings are crushed. They tell you
>>> that at the tasting room.

>> Sorry, but that's utter nonsense. You simply cannot make red
>> wine without crushing the grapes. Red colour comes from the
>> skin of the berries, so pre-crush free run juice from red
>> grapes is white.

> Michael, I hear you but that is what they said.

Hmmm.

> Is it possible "Free Run" means something different to different
> people?

Hmmm again. In fact I don't know.

> They were very specific to mention that on a tour there. It was
> like if the juice that initially comes from grapes using a
> baloon in the pressing machine is different than all the
> remaining from a crush.

That's how you would proceed with white wine.

> The initial flow is what they claimed to use for their best
> bottling. They refered to that as the free run juice.

Red wine procedure is - with our without destemming - crushing,
giving all that into a fermenting vessel and ferment. After two
to three weeks it's very well possible that part of what has
fermented runs off freely. Hugh Johnson (in my 1971 German edition
of his Wine Atlas) indicates that roughly one third runs off
without pressing.

> Then the remaining was "pressed"
>
> Probably marketing hype but that was said at 2-3 wineries.

Possibly simply a misunderstanding of what "crush" means?

M.

Yeah, I did not get it either.

Some Champaigne at my local wine store Jacquesson 731 or something like that
claimed to be "Free Run Juice:" when a tasting for a New Years party last
year.

I don't really know about it. I did enjoy their wine however one of my
favorites is Louis Roederer NV from France followed by their two Anderson
Valley wines and l'hermitage or something like that. Free run or not its
great...I prefer to Cristal.
"Michael Pronay" > wrote in message
...
> "Richard Neidich" > wrote:
>
>>>> Mark, I do know that in the case of BV George Latour Cabernet
>>>> they claim that the Georges is the Free Run Juice only. That
>>>> BV Napa and Rutherford bottlings are crushed. They tell you
>>>> that at the tasting room.
>
>>> Sorry, but that's utter nonsense. You simply cannot make red
>>> wine without crushing the grapes. Red colour comes from the
>>> skin of the berries, so pre-crush free run juice from red
>>> grapes is white.
>
>> Michael, I hear you but that is what they said.
>
> Hmmm.
>
>> Is it possible "Free Run" means something different to different
>> people?
>
> Hmmm again. In fact I don't know.
>
>> They were very specific to mention that on a tour there. It was
>> like if the juice that initially comes from grapes using a
>> baloon in the pressing machine is different than all the
>> remaining from a crush.
>
> That's how you would proceed with white wine.
>
>> The initial flow is what they claimed to use for their best
>> bottling. They refered to that as the free run juice.
>
> Red wine procedure is - with our without destemming - crushing,
> giving all that into a fermenting vessel and ferment. After two
> to three weeks it's very well possible that part of what has
> fermented runs off freely. Hugh Johnson (in my 1971 German edition
> of his Wine Atlas) indicates that roughly one third runs off
> without pressing.
>
>> Then the remaining was "pressed"
>>
>> Probably marketing hype but that was said at 2-3 wineries.
>
> Possibly simply a misunderstanding of what "crush" means?
>
> M.

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:


> Some Champaigne at my local wine store Jacquesson 731 or
> something like that claimed to be "Free Run Juice:" when
> a tasting for a New Years party last year.

That's simply impossible, because there is no free run juice,
period.

They most certainly mixed it up with what is called "cuvée"
in Champagne, 2,050 liters of must coming from the first
pressing of 4,000 kgs of grapes. 500 further liters of lesser
quality is the "taille".*) I frequently have heard from better
Champagnes to use the cuvée only, but never ever from free-run
juice.

*) This regulation dates from 1990. Before that, 2,050 liters
were the cuvée, 410 liters première taille and 205 liters
deuxième taille. These seemingly unround figures came from
the traditional cask called "pièce champenoise" holding 205
liters. One "marc" of 4,000 kgs of grapes (that's what one
press holds) gives 10 pièces of cuvée, 2 pièces of première
and 1 pièce of deuxième taille, which summed up to a legal
maximum of 2,665 liters of must. Today it's 100 liters less.

HTH a little,

M.

Bupkis wrote:

> Recently had a bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, which
> was described on its label as being "made from
> only free run juice."
>
> I've heard of free range chicken but have never
> heard this type of term applied to wine. Does
> this mean anything or is it just marketing
> overkill?

For the most part it is marketing overkill.

I like to read the post by those who have never
made wine in their entire life and yet act as if
they were experts.

As an amateur wine maker, I make about 100 gallons
of wine a year. After I retired as a Geologist,
I worked part-time for a commercial winery for a
couple years

Some wine makers will keep the "free run" separate
from the press run (and even keep the different
press runs separate). Usually, for the most
part, most are eventually combined.

It is not intuitively obvious, but if you collect
"free run juice and pressed juice and put them in
separate tanks or carboys, the "free run" will
have more suspended material which may cause H2S
and or other reductive problems in the wine than
the pressed fraction.

Presses will generally NOT crush seeds. There are
good things in the juice in the skins and pressed
juice. It is over-hype or just plain nonsense to
think that "free run" is superior.

If you don't believe it, start a new adventure in
your life and make your own wine.

"Paul E. Lehmann" wrote ......
>
> For the most part it is marketing overkill.
>

OK - I have stayed out of this discussion, but feel it is time to throw in
my 2 cents worth.

Discloser: I am not a winemaker - I *was* one of those misaligned
"marketers"

My thoughts and recollections are thus:

Red Wines (we made a more than acceptable Pinot Noir) = No such thing as
free run.

Grapes were destemmed, and crushed, and fermented in open fermenters,
plunged and pumped over to get desired extraction of tannins and colour.

White grapes were treated differently.

We grew chardonnay, Riesling, pinot blanc and pinot gris.

All were crushed and destemmed, and dumped into the press(es).

All juice which drained without any form of pressure was termed "free run" -
and kept fermented separately.

Juice which was pressed "light, medium & heavy" was also fermented
separately.

Depending upon what the winemaker was trying to "express" - he would blend
wines accordingly.

So, it was possible for "free run" [chardonnay] juice to be fermented in oak
barriques, but a portion of pressed must to be fermented in stainless steel,
and blended in with the free run wine - according to the winemakers will.

IMVHO, if one was speaking of red wine, the term "free run" is irrelevant.

However, I do place some credence if one was discussing white wines.

--

st.helier

Mike Tommasi wrote:

> I think there is a confusion here between free
> run wine and free run juice.
>
> Free run wine(vin de goutte) is the wine (red)
> obtained from grapes (red) that have been
> fermented and macerated and that have not yet
> been pressed. Free run wine is not white, it is
> red, due to maceration in contact with skins for
> a certain number of days.
>
> Therefore, there can only be free run wine in
> red wines, because white wines are (normally)
> not macerated, they are pressed right away on
> arrival in the cellar and afterwards fermented
> with no skin contact.
>
> Free run juice is a concept that only applies to
> whites, it is the unfermented liquid produced
> before applying any pressure to the grapes, and
> it is removed before pressing because it would
> otherwise take up room needlessly in the press.
> It is usually combined immediately with the
> juice coming out of the press.
>
> Some may process this free run juice separately,
> under the pretext that the press juice is
> inferior somehow. That may have been true 30
> years ago, before the modern gentler presses
> were introduced. Today's presses for white wine
> are mostly pneumatic, the grapes are put in a
> large cylinder with a membrane, and air pressure
> is applied to the top half, the membrane applies
> a very gentle uniform pressure to the grapes in
> the bottom half.
>
> I suspect that today this free run juice thing
> is mostly marketing hype.
>
> Mike

I agree

>
>
>
> st.helier wrote:
>>
>> Red Wines (we made a more than acceptable Pinot
>> Noir) = No such thing as free run.
>>
>> Grapes were destemmed, and crushed, and
>> fermented in open fermenters, plunged and
>> pumped over to get desired extraction of
>> tannins and colour.
>>
>> White grapes were treated differently.
>>
>> We grew chardonnay, Riesling, pinot blanc and
>> pinot gris.
>>
>> All were crushed and destemmed, and dumped into
>> the press(es).
>>
>
>