pstarr wrote:There is also the issue that brett can strip fruit character. Not just about what it 'adds' to wines and whether you like those things or not.
I agree. It can detract from terroir, strip fruit character, taste like metallic elastoplasty horsepoo. But my point is that brett isn't always bad. It can be many things other than these familiar brett characters, and many of those in just the right amount can add interest, depth, character and perfume to a wine. And in that situation most people (myself included) would likely not even know the wine had brett in it.
pstarr wrote:There is also the issue that brett can strip fruit character. Not just about what it 'adds' to wines and whether you like those things or not.
I agree. It can detract from terroir, strip fruit character, taste like metallic elastoplasty horsepoo. But my point is that brett isn't always bad. It can be many things other than these familiar brett characters, and many of those in just the right amount can add interest, depth, character and perfume to a wine. And in that situation most people (myself included) would likely not even know the wine had brett in it.
But hard to answer the question, in those circumstances, of how much better the fruit would have been in the absence of the brett.
Indeed, or the fruit could even have been worse, if it's the brett which is tasting like fruit.
According to the wheel, brett can taste of citrus, strong floral/perfume, tropical/artificial or canned fruit, tamarind, violet, rose, lilac, lavender etc etc. Perhaps that lovely floral fruity perfumed note was the brett? How would you know? And if that 'strain' of brett wasn't commonly found outside the area, could that be terroir and no different to their oak treatment, time on lees etc?
I assume fruity brett flavours like this aren't very common in wine, but I'm trying to make a point here! Maybe it's brett Jim, but not as we know it.
