The Auswine Forum

Campbell Mattinson in the February 2006 WFM:
"And just when I was about to bask in the glory of it
all – I started to get mad. Because some mad fools
are pushing the line that Australian wine is getting
more and more awful, when indeed nothing could be
further from the truth. If you look properly, with an
unjaundiced eye, there are signs to be concerned
about in Australian wine right now – but also massive,
and widespread, and gloriously abundant signs that
Australian wine is better than it has ever been. Indeed,
better by a long, wine-loving, wine-drinking shot."

Excellent stuff from Campbell!
I assume its his response to the ridiculous thing that Ben Canaidier wrote a few weeks ago and I responded to in Torbs readers write section.

I'm still waiting to hear from Ben if he wants to find out why sane people make big, big reds. (and its not deranged winemaker ego!)

Cheers
Smithy..(.maker of what some would say are some of the country's most awful reds!)

smithy wrote:8)
Excellent stuff from Campbell!
I assume its his response to the ridiculous thing that Ben Canaidier wrote a few weeks ago and I responded to in Torbs readers write section.

Smithy, it wasn't obviously a response to that article, it's just that he had a particularly good set of wines for breakfast that day. And why aren't you a subscriber?

"I’d sat down to the usual start to the day – six wines, a
variety of styles, give them time to breathe and then
settle in and take a look."

"Chardonnay, sauvignon blanc, riesling,
pinot, shiraz [x2] – all peculiar, and individual, and shining with
personality."

To some extent, I agree with Campbell but then to some extent I disagree.

There is no doubts, that in many respects of Australian wines are getting better. At the low-cost end, due to the abundant supply of fruit, it now costs less to produce better quality wine. Manufacturing, and I used that word intentionally, of wines at the low-end is becoming more high-tech and the usage of techniques like micro oxygenation are making these wines a lot more approachable and easy to drink.

At the very top end, tannin management in many wines has improved out of sight resulting in wines that are much more approachable in the youth. Whilst these wines are more approachable and easy to drink in the youth, I'm not sure that they necessarily better, because it depends on your definition of the word better.

Many of these wines may not last as long as their predecessors and consequently may not develop the sort of characteristics that can only come from gloriously aged wine. So whilst they may be more enjoyable now, they may never turn into the sort of quality that saw their predecessors become wonderful old bottles.

To some extent, I'm one of those fools that Campbell refers to because I have some very serious concerns about the direction that some of Australia's wine is taking.

Much of it revolves around bad viticulture, young vines (that may be over irrigated or over cropped) and the tendency to push the ripeness envelope; and finally there is the overuse of coffee laden French oak.

So yes, in some areas they are becoming more enjoyable, but that does not necessarily mean they are getting better; in other areas they are definitely improving, but unfortunately there is a fair percentage of Australian wine, which is not cheap, that is cause for concern.

So Campbell, you can get mad at fools like me, (but we will still remain mates) and I will get mad and use my web site is a pulpit to try and get those who are over oaking their wine and pushing the ripeness envelope to ridiculous levels to try and back off, and really produced better wine.

Torb,
To lay a lot of the problems in the industry at the feet of bad viticulture is a bit much. By and large australian viticulturists have a better idea of the quality required by the winery than any other country in the world. The fact that companies gave out contracts for fruit quality they could not sell is not the viticulturists fault. If you look at the majority of vineyards for purchased fruit, they would at the moment be overdelivering on quality, as if they dont, the winery will not accept their fruit.

I do get tired of people laying into young vines, I have seen magnificent fruit come off young vines, and utter crap come off 50 year old vines. Talk about well managed v poor management, not some sweeping statement. I would be interested to see if anyone can pick the age of a vine in a blind tasting.

Whenever an Australian bottle of wine makes it over here to my table, I am always disappointed, why, because I see how far Mediterranean wines have to go to compete at the same price,and by and large they are a long way from the price-quality point, and that has been my job. You have never had it so good.

I have been drinking a fair few Puglian and Sicilian wines recently. They are good value and good quality....

GW

Masala,

I would beg to differ.

The logic behind my rationale of blaming poor viticulture on a lot of the problems with Australian wine is not just throwing a dart into a dartboard and picking the number where it landed. It is being done after careful consideration, tasting lots of wine, talking to many winemakers and above all talking to a number of excellent viticulturalist over the last few years.

One thing you are correct about, is that it is quite possible to make absolutely top-class wine from new vines, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Likewise, it's just as possible to produce crap grapes from old vines. We are talking about generality here not the exceptions to the rule. Torbreck has a reputation for producing terrific wine from young vines, but they pay an enormous premium for the grapes and are incredibly exacting in what they require. At the other end of the spectrum, you have wineries like Kaesler that go out chasing quality old vine material because of the quality of the wine they know they can produce from these grapes.

A huge percentage of the vineyards in Australia today were not there 10 years ago. Many of these vineyards are over cropped or heavily irrigated and whilst they may make acceptable wines in good vintages, they certainly don't make great wines and the quality (or lack thereof) really shows up in poor vintages.

If you have a look at somebody like Jeremy Oliver's tasting notes, see how frequently he mentions under ripe and overripe characters in wines. What is responsible for these characters in the wine?

When wines go into the prune spectrum and have been left to hang too long, who is responsible? These problems are directly attributable to viticultural decisions, no matter who is making them.

We may have some of the best viticulturalist in the world, but resting on our laurels is not good enough and there are some areas that need improvement.

I think this thread encapsulates the absolute greatness of this forum. An excellent writer (yes I subscribe!), two top independents (the Bigot Bros) and a winemaker all thinking about where the Aussie industry is going now.

I love Aussie reds: they are what I want to drink. TORB, I agree with what you say on the coffee oaking: based on my tastings in the last 6 months, mainly in the good mid-range stuff. Lots of lovely wines but a high percentage could have the oak lowered 20-50% to let the fruit shine through more clearly. More of my dollars seem to be moving into Victorian Shiraz rather than SA these days. Mitchelton Print Shiraz 1998 may have been a watershed wine for me. Tasty ...

On the whole, what I am seeing (tasting?) is that Aussie wines at the low levels (Yellow Tail, Oomoos etc) are over-confected, sweet and shallow - They are going another route to the mid-scale wines which can be excellent (to my palate the Filsell 2002 and St Hallett Blackwell 2002, both lovely wines).

Yet the "classic" QPR intro to Aussie reds in years gone by would be Koonunga Hill which had true ability in the good years (1990, 1996 etc) to be a very very good wine indeed and had the ability to "up-palate" a drinker rapidly to (say) Bin 389 level. Now I see a polarisation of the quality levels in that cheaper wines tho' sometimes attractive, do nothing to indicate more complex / savoury characteristics at levels going up.

To chip in, there are some damn good Greek reds these days at 25AUD in the UK. I remember being gob-smacked tasting one in Stockholm in 2000 (a friend and I did a bottle each ) and will never view their reds the same way. But unlike Australia, they have no real marketing yet.

That's my 2 cents, long live auswine forum!

Cheers -- Jay.

OK, I am going to buy into this discussion and I have my flame suit on!

My personal belief for why we have seen the change to wine over the years, is because of the consumption increase per capita in many countries around the world. Rightly or wrongly the industry has had to develop to the point, that for the most part, are producing wines that will appeal to the masses. The masses are generally people that turn up to a bottle shop or have a small amount of wine at home, that drink wine young and therefore want something approachable sooner rather than later.

Yes technology changes can and have been for the better, but for the most part IMO it has been developed for the "masses" and therefore the commercial aspect.

IMO, This culture, in many cases that drives the industry, and the change to viticulture technics has diversified the wine available to us all. Yes there is wineries around that hold onto the necessary technics that produce wine for the die hard sick puppies like myself Ahhhhhh . I do enjoy wines from all methods but it can be a minefield when figuring out what to buy. There is nothing worse than taking a punt on a purchase and getting it terribly wrong. At least I have my mother in law who I can feed these too - Did I say that!

But as we research and develop these changing ways of making wine, the wineries are bound to get it very right, very wrong and everything in between. However for the most part to the massess the right and wrong isn't as noticeable and in some cases it is a case of, I paid $xx for this wine so therefore it must be good - Mmmm, it's good isn't it, I paid xx for it!

With regard to drinking wine from developing countries and regions, well this is pretty simple IMO. Generally, these countries have cheaper labour rates but if they want to break into the market place, they have to cut the GP in the short to medium term to make better wine. This does help us the end consumer also. In saying that, you only have to look at the average wage of the Pauillac region and then wonder why the wine is so expensive. There are wineries these days in "prestige" regions that are making wines which are more approachable for the "masses" at a younger age.

At the end of the day, there are wines that I am sure we all enjoy that are made from all walks of life but I do hope we never lose sight of the history!

With regard to Ric's comment about low cost end wines getting better, I agree and disagree. If you look at the wineries/companies that have been making lower end wines under the same name/label, I believe that generally in many cases we have seen an overall reduction in quality and longevity of the lower price end labels that have been around for many years.

In closing, I wish we could keep the end price of great wines under control, cause my pocket cringes just about everytime I buy wine. At least forums like this, RB's site and the net help us get the best possible value for our hard earned cash!

OK, I am ducking now!

Finney

Torb,
we will agree to disagree, but I would be interested in wines you would say were overirrigated,

Gary, which Puglian and Sicilians have you been looking at, as I do most of my work in those areas. I would be interested in how the price matches up locally

cheers

Azienda Agricola Cos - Cerasuolo di Vittoria 2003 $45 (sicily)
Tomaresca Rosso 2001 - $22 (puglia)
Azienda Agricola Conti Zecca - Donna Marzia negroamaro 2002 (puglia) - $20ish
etc
etc

All very good wines. Unbuggered by oak. Good fruit. Well made.

GW

For me, one of the issues here is the (to my palate anyway) over-toasting of the oak, which leads to all these coffee/vanillary flavours, which does nothing for me, especially in the whites. Admittedly I am a crisp clean riesling fan but also I love my reds with savoury fruit and well integrated oak and that is not always easy with some of the efforts we see here. I see this over-toasting especially as a problem for a fair amount of WA chardonnay.

Cheers

Dave

Gary W wrote:Azienda Agricola Cos - Cerasuolo di Vittoria 2003 $45 (sicily)
Tomaresca Rosso 2001 - $22 (puglia)
Azienda Agricola Conti Zecca - Donna Marzia negroamaro 2002 (puglia) - $20ish
etc
etc

All very good wines. Unbuggered by oak. Good fruit. Well made.

GW

Cos makes a nice wine, think of them as the very pointy end of quality for sicily, can be a bit bretty for my taste. Try some morgante, good example of NDA
Tomaresca is part of the Antinori group, try the Boca del Lupo, I had it this week and it was a pretty good aglianico, doesnt rip your mouth out with tannin and acid. Negro amaro is my favorite italian variety, just because it is so distinct. That jaffa orange character is very appealling to me. 2001, and 2003 were good for negro amaro, 2002, 2004, 2005 were write offs.

TORB wrote:... and finally there is the overuse of coffee laden French oak.

I still consider the overuse of dill/coconut laden American an even greater problem. Not dissing what you're saying, Rick, just adding a bit. Perhaps you're suggesting this is a more recent problem with more makers shifting to French and away from American oak? Over oaking, whatever the source, is the major concern for me. The sooner it's addressed, the better.

TORB wrote: ...... I will get mad and use my web site is a pulpit to try and get those who are over oaking their wine and pushing the ripeness envelope to ridiculous levels to try and back off, and really produced better wine.

That's more or less what I was hoping to hear!

dlo wrote:
Perhaps you're suggesting this is a more recent problem with more makers shifting to French and away from American oak? Over oaking, whatever the source, is the major concern for me.

Hi DLO,

You have been quiet lately mate, good to hear from you.

.... yep, that's exactly what I am saying. There is a shift to using more French Oak in some quarters but over oaking is still over oaking. IMO oak should add to the complexity of the wine, not dominate it completely. In some cases, the toast level also seems to high. If there is sufficient fruit to absorb the oak in the long run, its not so much of an issue but if there is not enough fruit you wind up with an oak shake, be it dill, vanilla or coffee.

marsalla wrote:

Gary W wrote:Azienda Agricola Cos - Cerasuolo di Vittoria 2003 $45 (sicily)
Tomaresca Rosso 2001 - $22 (puglia)
Azienda Agricola Conti Zecca - Donna Marzia negroamaro 2002 (puglia) - $20ish
etc
etc

All very good wines. Unbuggered by oak. Good fruit. Well made.

GW

Cos makes a nice wine, think of them as the very pointy end of quality for sicily, can be a bit bretty for my taste.

A review of the 2003 here http://www.winorama.com.au/?p=181
Bretty yes. Nice brett though. Excellent wine.

GW

I agree with dlo re the overuse of american oak. Far too much vanilla. I think some low end wines exhibit this as well as a few higher priced wines. I prefer oaked wines in balance with fruit. I agree overuse of french oak is bad. However, I believe there is more instances in OZ wines of the over use of American oak then French. Despite this criticism I firmly believe that there has been great improvement in the quality and availability of OZ wines over the past twenty years or so that I have been tasting OZ wine.

Ever heard of tobacco flavoured oak.Neither had I but believe me it exists,Just add it during ferment.Guess it cuts down on time in barels so the wine can be released earlier.