Page 1 of 1

Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:07 pm
by Panda 9D
This topic might be elsewhere so feel free to move it/delete it if need be. I was wondering what people thought about this. I think Australia should be making more blends with their A-grade fruit and not just putting their B-grade into a GSM or something like that. Is anyone noticing a shift toward blends in Australian wine?

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:01 pm
by Waiters Friend
A good subject, Panda 9D

I think the emphasis on varietals, and the inherent assumption that a wine was somehow better or purer as a varietal, has been slowly reducing since around 2000, and heading back towards equilibrium - where whatever makes the best wine should go into it.

I was at a barrel tasting on Sunday with a small Perth Hills producer, who makes a large number of hatfuls of wine, and explores blending opportunities. They make varietals as well, but their flagship red is always a blend, and there is no shortage of national and international icons that use blending to make the best wine.

Also, most varietal wines are blends of different parcels, pickings and sites, that make the best example of that variety for the winery concerned.

Cheers

Allan

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:21 pm
by Mike Hawkins
Penfolds make some really good blends from time to time with their Special Bin and Cellar Reserve labels. The fruit in those are definitely A grade, and the same for Wolf Blass Black Label. To your point, it would be good to see more like them.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:52 pm
by Panda 9D
Yeah, Penfold's is the obvious exception but the majority of wineries put their best fruit into varietal wines. I just wonder if people see this continuing into the future.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:00 pm
by phillisc
Majella Mallea
Yalumba signature
Petaluma Coonawarra
Cullen DM
Howard Park
MM Quintet
YY blends
Wendouree blends
Redbank Sally's
Bleasdale Frank Potts
Rockford rod and spur...
Pennies 389

Wynns centenary and old Virgin Hills...the best blends i have ever had

all crackers happily sitting in the cellar
Yep agree should be more of these

cheers
Craig

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:06 am
by Rossco
I used to be in the exact same boat a few years ago refusing to drink blends believing they were all made from inferior fruit.

THEN i had the David Franz Cab/Shiraz and was absolutely blown away. Its was rich, sumptuous and even though it was a few years
ago, I still remember the taste, how much i enjoyed it & where I was (at Moo Moo's on the GC)

Since then, Majella The Malleea & John Duval Plexus GSM have become favourites as well as my first blend love Uncle Dave :-D

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:42 am
by rens
I had similar thoughts the other day. I was at the local big chain looking at the Teusner FG range. Grenache, Shiraz and Mataro all single vineyard stuff. Every time I've had it (I've only had the shiraz- 06 and 09)I've thought they were very good wines. But I did wounder what an GSM FG would be like. Perhaps I'll send Kym an email because surely he would have experimented... surely?

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:58 am
by Peter Schlesinger
rens wrote:I had similar thoughts the other day. I was at the local big chain looking at the Teusner FG range. Grenache, Shiraz and Mataro all single vineyard stuff. Every time I've had it (I've only had the shiraz- 06 and 09)I've thought they were very good wines. But I did wounder what an GSM FG would be like. Perhaps I'll send Kym an email because surely he would have experimented... surely?


Rens I'm not sure you need to spend all those bucks on a bottle from the FG range to get a feel for what Kym can do with a blend. The current sub $20 shiraz/mataro release of "The Independent" has been very well received. Still haven't tried it myself but it's on my to do list. Seems like shiraz/mataro is the new cabernet/shiraz combination that Penfolds worked so beautifully last millenium.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:08 am
by Polymer
I think a lot of the Cabernet Sauvignon we see are actually blends but because they hit that 85% mark they just say Cabernet Sauvignon....I think more so in WA....Bordeaux blends are pretty normal IMO..but I do agree that a lot of people seem to perceive blends as inferior and that is reinforced by the fact that most of the blends they see ARE inferior because the fruit used was not as good...
A lot of good Cab Shiraz blends though...as as Peter said, Shiraz Mataro is looking pretty good as they're figuring out how to balance the fruit w/ some savoury characters and getting some good acidity from the Mataro...
GSM blends, given their place in the market right now as far as what they can get price wise...not sure we will see top tier fruit in there or in there often ...although there are some really good examples (John Duval Plexus).

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:26 am
by kaos
I thought it was roundly agreed that Cabernet Sauvignon SHOULD be blended for best results. I, for one, would like to see a lot more Cab Franc planted and used in this country.... I'm not a big fan of cab/shiraz blending - hard for me to really articulate why. But doing wacky things can have very pleasing results. I had a pinot/shiraz blend from the Bellarine region that was a perfectly harmonious and successful blend. I reckon we could see more of that (I'd rather aromatics and mouthfeel from a small percentage of pinot than viognier)......

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:58 am
by rens
Peter Schlesinger wrote:
rens wrote:I had similar thoughts the other day. I was at the local big chain looking at the Teusner FG range. Grenache, Shiraz and Mataro all single vineyard stuff. Every time I've had it (I've only had the shiraz- 06 and 09)I've thought they were very good wines. But I did wounder what an GSM FG would be like. Perhaps I'll send Kym an email because surely he would have experimented... surely?


Rens I'm not sure you need to spend all those bucks on a bottle from the FG range to get a feel for what Kym can do with a blend. The current sub $20 shiraz/mataro release of "The Independent" has been very well received. Still haven't tried it myself but it's on my to do list. Seems like shiraz/mataro is the new cabernet/shiraz combination that Penfolds worked so beautifully last millenium.



Hi Peter. I'm a big fan of Avatar (I must have more than 2 dozen accross 6 vintages in the cellar) and just wondered what it would be like with the very best fruit.

FG, I'd imagine (Just before a smart arse gets in)...

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:46 pm
by Peter Schlesinger
Hi Peter. I'm a big fan of Avatar (I must have more than 2 dozen accross 6 vintages in the cellar) and just wondered what it would be like with the very best fruit.

FG, I'd imagine (Just before a smart arse gets in)...[/quote]

I'm with you on that Rens. I'm also drinking Roger Pike's 2007 shiraz mouvedre (Symposium) while I'm typing. Normally this would not have lasted the night it was opened but lots of things got in the way. Three days on and it's still singing. Now to track down that Independent.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:05 pm
by Mike Hawkins
kaos wrote:I thought it was roundly agreed that Cabernet Sauvignon SHOULD be blended for best results. I, for one, would like to see a lot more Cab Franc planted and used in this country.... I'm not a big fan of cab/shiraz blending - hard for me to really articulate why. But doing wacky things can have very pleasing results. I had a pinot/shiraz blend from the Bellarine region that was a perfectly harmonious and successful blend. I reckon we could see more of that (I'd rather aromatics and mouthfeel from a small percentage of pinot than viognier)......


I guess I'm on the other side of the fence - I think cab / shiraz (or vice versa) blends are the wines Oz does the best. The structure of cabernet is a great starting point, and the lushness of shiraz fills any mid-palate weakness..... I absolutely love the Yalumba blends (Sig and The Reserve) and pre-97 Bin 389, as well as St Henri when it was blend. These wines are only just hitting their stride at 20 years of age...

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:33 pm
by griff
Mike Hawkins wrote:
kaos wrote:I thought it was roundly agreed that Cabernet Sauvignon SHOULD be blended for best results. I, for one, would like to see a lot more Cab Franc planted and used in this country.... I'm not a big fan of cab/shiraz blending - hard for me to really articulate why. But doing wacky things can have very pleasing results. I had a pinot/shiraz blend from the Bellarine region that was a perfectly harmonious and successful blend. I reckon we could see more of that (I'd rather aromatics and mouthfeel from a small percentage of pinot than viognier)......


I guess I'm on the other side of the fence - I think cab / shiraz (or vice versa) blends are the wines Oz does the best. The structure of cabernet is a great starting point, and the lushness of shiraz fills any mid-palate weakness..... I absolutely love the Yalumba blends (Sig and The Reserve) and pre-97 Bin 389, as well as St Henri when it was blend. These wines are only just hitting their stride at 20 years of age...


Hear, hear. A 1974 Wolf Blass Black Label tasted in May has made me think of the blend in a different light. It certainly can age!

cheers

Carl

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:44 am
by Mahmoud Ali
Mike Hawkins wrote:I guess I'm on the other side of the fence - I think cab / shiraz (or vice versa) blends are the wines Oz does the best. The structure of cabernet is a great starting point, and the lushness of shiraz fills any mid-palate weakness..... I absolutely love the Yalumba blends (Sig and The Reserve) and pre-97 Bin 389, as well as St Henri when it was blend. These wines are only just hitting their stride at 20 years of age...


I agree wholeheartedly. More producers should use their best wines to go into the blends. I think Penfolds showed the way with some of their early Koonunga Hills and, of course, the Bin 389s. Mike, I did not know that the St Henri was at one time a blend.

Mahmoud.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:27 pm
by rens
Mahmoud Ali wrote:
Mike Hawkins wrote:I guess I'm on the other side of the fence - I think cab / shiraz (or vice versa) blends are the wines Oz does the best. The structure of cabernet is a great starting point, and the lushness of shiraz fills any mid-palate weakness..... I absolutely love the Yalumba blends (Sig and The Reserve) and pre-97 Bin 389, as well as St Henri when it was blend. These wines are only just hitting their stride at 20 years of age...


I agree wholeheartedly. More producers should use their best wines to go into the blends. I think Penfolds showed the way with some of their early Koonunga Hills and, of course, the Bin 389s. Mike, I did not know that the St Henri was at one time a blend.

Mahmoud.



Even Grange is a blend by definition. A splash of Cabernet in every bottle.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:29 am
by Milan
Most consumers in Australia still hold their nose up at Aussie blends...yet will happily drink a Bordeaux! Go figure!

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:45 am
by odyssey
Milan wrote:Most consumers in Australia still hold their nose up at Aussie blends...yet will happily drink a Bordeaux! Go figure!


I don't know about you, but I don't know a lot of Aussie straight-variety consumers who drink Bordeaux. As soon as you bring out a bottle with a foreign word on it they suddenly start sounding like Darryl Kerrigan from The Castle "what do you call this?!".

The ones I know who appreciate a foreign wine have no problem drinking a cab-blend or GSM. And the ones I know who enjoy a good Bordeaux love Lake's Folly and Mt Mary.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:22 am
by rens
odyssey wrote:
Milan wrote:Most consumers in Australia still hold their nose up at Aussie blends...yet will happily drink a Bordeaux! Go figure!


I don't know about you, but I don't know a lot of Aussie straight-variety consumers who drink Bordeaux. As soon as you bring out a bottle with a foreign word on it they suddenly start sounding like Darryl Kerrigan from The Castle "what do you call this?!".

The ones I know who appreciate a foreign wine have no problem drinking a cab-blend or GSM. And the ones I know who enjoy a good Bordeaux love Lake's Folly and Mt Mary.


Blends are probably not that popular with many, but I think that is to our advantage. Imagine if everyone found out about Teusner Avatar or some of the Bordeaux blends comming from Margaret River. Those of us that love them would be paying a premium. I'm glad not many people go for these.

Re: Blends vs Varietal

Posted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:45 am
by paulf
You just have to look at France, Spain, Portugal and Italy for examples of high end blending.
Having been in Portugal recently, I got to taste quite a range of table wines from various producers and in all cases the top wine of each of these producers was a blend. All of them had varietal wines, usually Touriga Nacional, but I also saw Tinta Roriz (aka Tempranillo) and even a couple of examples of Sousau, but the blend was always better. Quinta do Crasto Vinha Maria Teresa, which is a field blend, is probably the best wine I have ever tasted. Also, to my knowledge there is only one Vintage Port on the market that is not a blend (Maghalaes).

I'd add Castagna Un Segreto (Shiraz/Sangiovese) to the list of top class Australian blends.