For a little change of pace, I picked up a bottle of Pascal Jolivet 2003
Sancerre ($16US). If I had been served this wine blind I'd have _sworn_
that it was a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc! It is almost colorless, with a
slight greenish cast and has the typical "cat ****" aroma that is so
distinctive of this varietal. There was nothing in the nose that betrayed
its French origin, and only a slight softness on the palate that hinted at
it. I recalled someone on this NG opining that Marlborough SBs seemed to
show no trace of terroir - only fruit.

That got me to wondering:
Could it be that terroir is a function of very slight, regional
microbiological infections? ( I hesitate to use the term "spoilage".) IOW,
if a wine is made very meticulously cleanly (as this wine obviously was) it
will show _only_ fruit and give little or no hint of the origins of that
fruit? Obviously this could only apply to white wines, as red grapes are
fermented on their skins along with all the dirt etc. that comes in on them
from the field. White juices OTOH are often very well cold settled and
racked away from all that muck before it has much of a chance to affect the
flavor.

Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the terroir
with the bathwater, so to speak?

Tom S

"Tom S" > wrote in
. com:



>
> Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the
> terroir with the bathwater, so to speak?
>
> Tom S
>
There is very little in the way of white wine that can imitate a Chablis. I
would like to ascribe most of the wet pebbles taste to terroir but I could
be wrong it has happened.

"jcoulter" > wrote in message
...
> There is very little in the way of white wine that can imitate a Chablis.
I
> would like to ascribe most of the wet pebbles taste to terroir but I could
> be wrong it has happened.

I've tasted - no, actually more _smelled_, what you are referring to, but
have not found it to be universally present in Chablis, or completely absent
in Chardonnay from other areas.

Are we confusing terroir with soil again? I'm still somewhat confused about
the distinction. I'd always assumed that terroir was pretty much the same
as terre - but my French is virtually nonexistent, and recently the
distinction was pointed out to me here.

As a citizen of the USA, I'm quite ingrained with the concept of separation
of powers, so viewing soil, climate and clone (as well as perhaps indigenous
microbiological characteristics) all separately is quite comfortable to me -
much moreso than mixing those properties all together and calling it
"terroir". That may be a bit metaphorical, but I find it useful.

Tom S

jcoulter wrote:

>>Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the
>>terroir with the bathwater, so to speak?

> There is very little in the way of white wine that can imitate a Chablis. I
> would like to ascribe most of the wet pebbles taste to terroir but I could
> be wrong it has happened.

This was the first example that came to my mind, too. I have had other
non- (or lightly) oaked, non-ML chardonnays from NZ, Oregon and CA, but
none have come close to capturing the essence of what makes Chablis so
special and unique.

Mark Lipton

"Tom S" > wrote in message .com>...
> For a little change of pace, I picked up a bottle of Pascal Jolivet 2003
> Sancerre ($16US). If I had been served this wine blind I'd have _sworn_
> that it was a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc! It is almost colorless, with a
> slight greenish cast and has the typical "cat ****" aroma that is so
> distinctive of this varietal. There was nothing in the nose that betrayed
> its French origin, and only a slight softness on the palate that hinted at
> it. I recalled someone on this NG opining that Marlborough SBs seemed to
> show no trace of terroir - only fruit.
>
> That got me to wondering:
> Could it be that terroir is a function of very slight, regional
> microbiological infections? ( I hesitate to use the term "spoilage".) IOW,
> if a wine is made very meticulously cleanly (as this wine obviously was) it
> will show _only_ fruit and give little or no hint of the origins of that
> fruit? Obviously this could only apply to white wines, as red grapes are
> fermented on their skins along with all the dirt etc. that comes in on them
> from the field. White juices OTOH are often very well cold settled and
> racked away from all that muck before it has much of a chance to affect the
> flavor.
>
> Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the terroir
> with the bathwater, so to speak?
>
> Tom S


I'd venture that it has more to do in this particular case with the
fact that Jolivet is a very 'modern' or 'New World style' producer.
His Sancerre's stylistically and winemaking methodology are closer to
NZ than most of his peers.

The other difficulty is that Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
Sauvignon Blanc.
This is in total contrast to PN or Chardonnay which are more of a
blank slate, a 'winemaker's' grape if you will.
The main difference, like with Cab, is in the profile of a somewhat
underripe Sauvignon Blanc (Loire, usually the grassy, goosberry, etc.
profile) and the usually riper NZ version (bigger fruit, grapefruit,
citrus, etc.)

Peter

Peter Muto wrote:

>The other difficulty is that Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
>is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
>what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
>Sauvignon Blanc.
>
>
Unfortunately Peter, several California wineries have been able to
remove all traces of varietal
characteristics with their 100% malolactic fermentation and new oak. It
has less flavor than
their Chardonnays. Chalk Hill is the main contender in this group.

Tom S. wrote:
"the typical "cat ****" aroma"


No no no! Not "cat ****!"
Blackcurrant bud!

silly you.

Ok, I'm kidding. We all know what it smells like. But I have been
schooled more than once that this distinct aroma is "blackcurrant
bud."

emily
(winemonger)

"winemonger" > wrote in message
om...
> Tom S. wrote:
> "the typical "cat ****" aroma"
>
>
> No no no! Not "cat ****!"
> Blackcurrant bud!
>
> silly you.
>
> Ok, I'm kidding. We all know what it smells like. But I have been
> schooled more than once that this distinct aroma is "blackcurrant
> bud."

I can assure you that cat **** is a lot easier reference to find than
blackcurrant buds - and I don't even _have_ a cat! I don't think I've ever
seen blackcurrants, much less their buds.

Tom S

"Bill" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Muto wrote:
>
> >The other difficulty is that Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
> >is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
> >what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
> >Sauvignon Blanc.
> >
> >
> Unfortunately Peter, several California wineries have been able to
> remove all traces of varietal
> characteristics with their 100% malolactic fermentation and new oak. It
> has less flavor than
> their Chardonnays.

That's because Sauvignon Blanc at full ripeness simply doesn't have the
intensity of ripe Chardonnay. That's why it was dubbed many years ago as
"the poor man's Chardonnay".

Also, fully ripe SB tastes and smells very little of what you perceive as
"varietal" (you know - that grassy, cat **** aroma).

Tom S

"Peter Muto" > wrote in message
om...
> Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
> is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
> what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
> Sauvignon Blanc.
> This is in total contrast to PN or Chardonnay which are more of a
> blank slate, a 'winemaker's' grape if you will.

I agree with that assessment of Chardonnay, which is one of the things that
I find makes it the most fun of any varietal to vinify. I disagree with
that with respect to Pinot Noir (and other reds) however. Red wines are
mostly made in the vineyard.

Tom S

>The other difficulty is that Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
>is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
>what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
>Sauvignon Blanc.
>This is in total contrast to PN or Chardonnay which are more of a
>blank slate, a 'winemaker's' grape if you will.

>Peter
>

I'm surprised you would say tht about Pinot Noir. Just my opinion, but all
versions to me seem to retain a bacis cherry and spicy flavor. Although they
seem to vary more in body more than any other varietal (eg Rully vs. Gevrey
Chambertin).

Tom Schellberg

Salut/Hi Tom S,

le/on Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:04:00 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

>Sancerre ($16US). If I had been served this wine blind I'd have _sworn_
>that it was a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc!
[snip]

>That got me to wondering:
>Could it be that terroir is a function of very slight, regional
>microbiological infections? ( I hesitate to use the term "spoilage".)

[snip]
>Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the terroir
>with the bathwater, so to speak?

What a fascinating question. Thanks for asking.

I'm saying nothing, (My brother, who lurks here from time to time, would no
doubt roar with laughter and tell you that's a first!). and reading
everyone's comments.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

(excuse if this is a repeat, my newsreader seems to not have posted several
replies to several threads over last day)


In article > , "Tom S"
> writes:

> Pascal Jolivet 2003
>Sancerre ($16US). If I had been served this wine blind I'd have _sworn_
>that it was a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc! It is almost colorless, with a
>slight greenish cast and has the typical "cat ****" aroma that is so
>distinctive of this varietal. There was nothing in the nose that betrayed
>its French origin, and only a slight softness on the palate that hinted at
>it. I recalled someone on this NG opining that Marlborough SBs seemed to
>show no trace of terroir - only fruit.

2003s are out already? I had the 2002 Jolivet Sancerre recently, thought it a
clear Sancerre with distinct minerality of flint & chalk. Can't imagine
mistaking for Marlborough. If this clearly had no sense of place, I'd wonder if
the freakish weather of 2003 just ripened the fruit in the Loire past the point
it shows at its most typical.

I really don't want to get into a drawn-out terroir discussion, I've been in
too many of those. But I'll just say that TO ME (I'm not defining for a
dictionary) terroir is the sense of place one gets from a wine. I would never
say that Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc has no terroir, for to me the terroir can
encompass the distinct flavors of the fruit. Terroir comes from a variety of
factors, not just soil.

You think "good" white winemakers obliterate terroir? Then I'll take the wines
of Helmut Dönnhoff, Michel Niellon, FX Pichler, Cotat, Pelle, etc.; you can
take the good winemakers
Dale

Dale Williams
Drop "damnspam" to reply

"Tom S" > wrote in message .com>...
> "Peter Muto" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Sauvignon Blanc (like Cabernet Sauvignon)
> > is extremely good at retaining its varietal characteristics no matter
> > what you to do it. If you eat a SB grape, you will instantly know it's
> > Sauvignon Blanc.
> > This is in total contrast to PN or Chardonnay which are more of a
> > blank slate, a 'winemaker's' grape if you will.
>
> I agree with that assessment of Chardonnay, which is one of the things that
> I find makes it the most fun of any varietal to vinify. I disagree with
> that with respect to Pinot Noir (and other reds) however. Red wines are
> mostly made in the vineyard.
>
> Tom S


I suppose that's more accurate. I suppose the winemaking procedure is
fairly similar for PN, the issue being the finicky grapes in the
vineyard. What I was trying to get at was Pinot Noir's ability to
express terroir, much more than say Cabernet or Sauvignon Blanc.

"Ian Hoare" > wrote in message
...
> Salut/Hi Tom S,
>
> le/on Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:04:00 GMT, tu disais/you said:-
>
> >Sancerre ($16US). If I had been served this wine blind I'd have _sworn_
> >that it was a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc!
> [snip]
>
> >That got me to wondering:
> >Could it be that terroir is a function of very slight, regional
> >microbiological infections? ( I hesitate to use the term "spoilage".)
>
> [snip]
> >Does good white winemaking technique consist in throwing away the terroir
> >with the bathwater, so to speak?
>
> What a fascinating question. Thanks for asking.
>
> I'm saying nothing, (My brother, who lurks here from time to time, would
no
> doubt roar with laughter and tell you that's a first!). and reading
> everyone's comments.

Hi, Ian -
Your silence speaks volumes!

Tom S

"Dale Williams" > wrote in message
...
> 2003s are out already? I had the 2002 Jolivet Sancerre recently, thought
it a
> clear Sancerre with distinct minerality of flint & chalk. Can't imagine
> mistaking for Marlborough. If this clearly had no sense of place, I'd
wonder if
> the freakish weather of 2003 just ripened the fruit in the Loire past the
point
> it shows at its most typical.

This wine (the 2003) didn't display any trace of overripeness. The varietal
grassiness characteristic of SB picked before full maturity was there, as
was the very pale color and modest alcohol (12½%).

> You think "good" white winemakers obliterate terroir?

Perhaps I didn't phrase that quite as well as I might have. Some winemakers
settle the solids out of the juice prior to fermentation and ferment only
the clear liquid; others ferment everything that comes through the press.
The difference in style between wines made by the former and the latter
methods is very distinct. The latter method produces less pure and
sometimes downright awful wines.

There is an in-between style that includes the _light_ solids in the
fermentation and discards the heavy solids. Perhaps this method of "walking
the fence" is responsible for what you might regard as "character",
"complexity" or "terroir" in the finished wine. Certainly, it isn't as
risky.

Personally, I prefer to use the cleanest juice I can get. It's a lot safer,
and renders a wine that is expressive of almost solely fruit and whatever
oak I choose to impart.

Tom S

"Peter Muto" > wrote in message
m...
> What I was trying to get at was Pinot Noir's ability to
> express terroir, much more than say Cabernet or Sauvignon Blanc.

Paso Robles Cabernet certainly smells and tastes different (to me, anyway)
from Napa Cabernet.

I'll concede that Pinot Noir does seem to reflect regional differences a bit
more obviously, however.

Tom S