Varietal Reflections Of Terroir

I've heard it stated any number of times by various "authorities",that PinotNoir, more than any other variety, reflects its terroir in which it's grown. I've heard the exact same thing stated about Nebbiolo. And about Riesling.
When I hear such statements, it always raises my BS antenna to high alert. I've asked the question "Why does PinotNoir (or Nebbiolo, or Riesling) reflect it's terroir better than any other variety...what is unique about Pinot that allows it to do this"???
Thus far, I've never received an answer that even remotely made sense. Usually, it's a bunch of inane yammering with circular logic that pussy-foots around the the question. The questionee always agrees that (PinotNoir/Nebbiolo/Riesling) does, indeed, reflect its terroir more than any other grape variety. But it usually boils down to a bunch of hand-waving, nebulous generalities, inane platitudes, and little more than "because it's so".
So...what do Nebbiolo and PinotNoir have in common??? Alledgedly, they are both varieties that are genetically unstable...that mutate at the drop of a hat. So, over a year ago, I speculated that PinotNoir (or Nebbiolo) reflect their terroir more than any other grape because they are genetically unstable. And, of course, Riesling doesn't fit that paradigm. When I made that suggestion out on the InterNet...total drop-dead silence.
So....at the Around The World With PinotNoir seminar at the TaosWinterWineFestival Friday, I asked that same question. I emphasized that "I don't know" was a perfectly legitimate answer, though highly unlikely. The three panelists blathered about it a bit, but seemed to be totally clueless on the subject. JoshJensen, sitting in the audience (off-duty), made some generalized comments and suggested it was because Pinot is a thin-skinned variety. Alas, so is Zinfandel, and it's never suggested that Zin reflect terroir particularly well.
And then...and then...JasmineHirsch was sitting in the audience and opined it was because PinotNoir is genetically weak. Bingo!!! But then she further added that their vnyd people assert that PinotNoir is not genetically unstable, so maybe that's not it, after all. Curses...foiled again.
So...once again I pose the question: Why is PinotNoir (or Nebbiolo or Riesling) more sensitive to its terroir than any other grape variety???. The whole future of WesternCivilization and the existence of the HiggsB hangs in the balance of a correct answer to this question.
I'll pose the same question to GiorgioRivetti when he's here next week.
Tom

I do not think all Riesling is more sensitive to local terroir. I agree that this is probably the case in Austria and Germany (and possibly Oz) but am not so sure about the Okanagan or Niagara...two areas I am more familiar with. Should be a lively discussion as I continue with my snow-removal tasks!
I do not think other punters here will be as brief as me (or as it I)!

I don't really relieve that there is anything special about PN, Nebiolo, or Riesling but would guess if true its related to higher acid levels and the ability to achieve ripeness at lower sugar levels.

Hi Tom,
Historically (for the most part because of the monks and monasteries) the grape varieties, Pinot Noir (Burgundy), Nebbiolo (Piedmont) and Riesling (Germany) where probably the first grapes to be planted using “monoculture”.

Salute

Hi Tom,
Historically (for the most part because of the monks and monasteries) the grape varieties, Pinot Noir (Burgundy), Nebbiolo (Piedmont) and Riesling (Germany) where probably the first grapes to be planted using “monoculture”.

Salute

Also in that line, Victor, the three grapes that were the most tightly controlled by the nobility/govt and the monks. They were almost always, from the beginning of their development treated as individual (often by mandate) varieties and not grapes grown and blended promiscuously (in the Italian sense) to be used in blends. Thus each makes a clearer representation of the specific "terroir", much more so than a blend as in Bordeaux or the Rhone, which would be more reflective of the manipulation or combination of the grapes rather than a particular place. It's a matter of emphasis.

I'm not sure the perceived genetic weakness of Pinot Noir in particular is directly related to showing teroir, especially in that we can't say the same about Riesling and Nebbiolo. What I can say is that the thin-skinned variety of PN is amazingly sensitive to and reflective of such things as wind (speed, temperature and direction), heat and cold, humidity and other elements---but that is because the 'closed shop' of Burgundy allows that to be exhibited quite clearly, and in a way discernible to even the most inexperienced.

I've also always thought, but could not process the thought through to fruition and explain it, that the extremely marginal environments of the home places of the three grapes isn't in some way connected to being seen as exemplars of terroir. Sort of like the idea of breeding a racehorse through bloodlines, or thanks to the monks an accelerated and intensified survival of the fittest.

Hi Tom,
Historically (for the most part because of the monks and monasteries) the grape varieties, Pinot Noir (Burgundy), Nebbiolo (Piedmont) and Riesling (Germany) where probably the first grapes to be planted using “monoculture”.
Salute

OK, Victor....I'll accept that. But I don't quite understand how that makes them reflect terroir butter than other varieties. Is it in their genetic code that they
remember they were the first to be a monoculture and, therefore, we're going to reflect the terroir more?? Guess I don't understand.
Tom

Its not that these varieties “reflect” their “terrior” better. If one wants to produce a wine using those wines as a “benchmark” (because of the early experiments, trial and errors, and decrees) one can make a “better prediction” about a given site.

Hi Hoke,
You mention “terrior” with regard to a “single variety” wine. Why can’t there be “terrior” with regard to a “blended” wine that emphasizes the “terrior” of a given site and all the grapes grown on that given site to produce a “single cuvée” wine? In line with having very "site specific" terrior and "regional" terrior.

Salute

well, how about this. it isn't the varieties that are so expressive of terroir; but the climate. and those three varieties - and some others - are quintessential cool climate varieties. warm climates tend to obscure varietal character - so in CdP 13 varietes may be used; while in northern climates, single varieties are more common. their varietal character is more obvious in cool climates as are the influences of the places they are grown. without so much warmth - and often richness of soil - there is more room for individualization. warm climates and/or rich soils deduct from the ability of vines to demonstrate varietal and terroir character. so zinfandel - which requires very warm climate and long growing season doesn't fit the pattern.

Its not that these varieties “reflect” their “terrior” better. If one wants to produce a wine using those wines as a “benchmark” (because of the early experiments, trial and errors, and decrees) one can make a “better prediction” about a given site.

Hi Hoke,
You mention “terrior” with regard to a “single variety” wine. Why can’t there be “terrior” with regard to a “blended” wine that emphasizes the “terrior” of a given site and all the grapes grown on that given site to produce a “single cuvée” wine? In line with having very "site specific" terrior and "regional" terrior.

Salute

Victor, no reason that couldn't happen. And it does happen. It's simply more difficult to do so because you're introducing significant variables, as well as placing more emphasis on the human manipulation. Creating a blend of, let's say the several varieties of Bordeaux, is inexorably weighted towards a person ( or even more difficult, several different people) and that makes the process more difficult. Hard to determine at that level what is terroir and what is design.

In my experience in the Rhone (as an example), the same varieties blended (Grenache, Syrah, Mourvedre) from village to village make distinctly different (and rather readily identifiable by village) wines: Chateauneuf and Gigondas, as two prominent illustrations.

3 unrelated (and to an extent inconsistent) ideas:

I would guess that it is historical accident that the great wine areas of Burgundy and Germany were split into named vineyards that achieved a degree of stability. That helps people identify terroir differences, real or imagined. Incidentally, does not Chardonnay in Burgundy reflect terroir to the same extent as Pinot Noir? I had not noticed much difference in what people write.

Another thing that Pinot Noir and Nebbiolo have in common is that they are very fussy grapes. They will only thrive in ideal conditions. Is that another way of saying that they reflect terroir?

Genetic instabilty may not be related to truly reflecting terroir, but it does provide another source of variation that might be mistaken for terroir where clones correlate with location.

In my experience in the Rhone (as an example), the same varieties blended (Grenache, Syrah, Mourvedre) from village to village make distinctly different (and rather readily identifiable by village) wines: Chateauneuf and Gigondas, as two prominent illustrations.

Yes, but you stand taller than most men in the Rhonish sphere.

I agree, of course, but don't know how to draw the distinction clearly between the aspect of soil/climate terroir and the aspect of "human terroir"---that the tastes are similar because the people have been working for generations within the same traditions to naturally achieve that similarity, while all are working with the same basic raw ingredients. And isn't that the essence of AOC?

Tom

You raise such a darn interesting question. Next time someone states that 'sensitivity to terroir' thing I'll leap on them.

I don't know, I've been thinking about it all day.

One thing came to mind. What do Pinot Noir, Nebbiolo and Riesling have in common? In the old world they're great varieties used to make single varietal wines whereas other great wines are blends - Burgundy vs Bdx, Neb vs Chianti ..
(before every one leaps on me, yes Chardonnay is a varietal in Burgundy, but that has a reputation of being very malleable to the winemaker.)

So perhaps PN, Nb R show terroir because they're not masked by being in a blend?

[Robin Garr]

warm climates and/or rich soils deduct from the ability of vines to demonstrate varietal and terroir character. so zinfandel - which requires very warm climate and long growing season doesn't fit the pattern.

Which might explain why so many Central Coast Pinot Noirs taste like Syrah? (And, of course, why Central Coast Syrah doesn't taste like Syrah.)

So, if I understand what has been said here, a Cab Franc from Chinon exhibits terroir, but a Cab Franc from Bordeaux doesn't, because it's either from a warm climate or because it will more than likely be blended?

So, if I understand what has been said here, a Cab Franc from Chinon exhibits terroir, but a Cab Franc from Bordeaux doesn't, because it's either from a warm climate or because it will more than likely be blended?

No, not exactly, Howie. I think from what has been said here, that a 100% Cab Franc from Chinon would rightly have to be compared to a 100% Cab Franc from Bordeaux to have any hope of attesting to any real sense of terroir specificity (and even then...). Putting a Cab Franc in a blend with several other varieties would "mask' or disguise the specificity of the variety, and thus the identity of terroir. (Hard to tell what's CF, CS, M, PV, Malbec, or Carm. when they're all mingled together.)

Also, I'd question whether Chinon is a colder climate than Bordeaux.

Also, I'd question whether Chinon is a colder climate than Bordeaux.

No need to question that. Chinon is colder.

Greetings from Sweden / Fredrik L

If terroir is so important, blending varieties wouldn't mask it. I think it is that important. Even a few short years into my own Bordeaux itch, I was able to tell the big 5 Left Bank communes apart blind.

If terroir is so important, blending varieties wouldn't mask it. I think it is that important. Even a few short years into my own Bordeaux itch, I was able to tell the big 5 Left Bank communes apart blind.

That's not necessarily terroir though, Chaim; that could simply be the stylistic decisions of the chateau.

Question: do you think the choice of barrel regimen is terroir?

Question: do you think the choice of barrel regimen is terroir?

From: http://www.terroir-france.com/theclub/meaning.htm

A " terroir " is a group of vineyards (or even vines) from the same region, belonging to a specific appellation, and sharing the same type of soil, weather conditions, grapes and wine making savoir-faire, which contribute to give its specific personality to the wine.

Terroir = Region + Appellation + Grapes + Wine making

Since barrel regimen is part of wine making, then, according to this definition, it is part of the terroir.

Question: do you think the choice of barrel regimen is terroir?

From: http://www.terroir-france.com/theclub/meaning.htm

A " terroir " is a group of vineyards (or even vines) from the same region, belonging to a specific appellation, and sharing the same type of soil, weather conditions, grapes and wine making savoir-faire, which contribute to give its specific personality to the wine.

Terroir = Region + Appellation + Grapes + Wine making

Since barrel regimen is part of wine making, then, according to this definition, it is part of the terroir.

Specifically regarding Bordeaux, I don't accept that definition, Howie, Or, rather, I consider it---in Bordeaux---to be rather meaningless. I understand the basic impetus to make that definition, as it entirely supports the concept of the large-scale AOC. And I believe it is an indicator of a general regional style---how could it not be with such over-arching regulations in France? But I am not as yet totally convinced that falls under terroir---or let's say a narrow focus of terroir.

When there can be so much variation among houses in such things as barrel regimen and how the grapes are treated, I can't fully subscribe differences among the five great houses as terroir. I reserve judgement on that one. Chateau Pavie, for instance. Is the furor raised over that house a matter of specific terroir of Chateau Pavie when it is argued that the manipulation decisions made by the winemaker/house generates an entirely different style of wine than was previously made? Is it truly terroir when new owners come in and totally change the nature of the house style? I'd say in those instances the 'human factor' ceases to be "savoir-faire" in nature, since that is specific and not in any way regional.

(And I know this isn't any different from the ongoing discussion/debate that the mention of terroir always stirs up. )

So take winemaking out of the picture. If one only tastes the grapes and not the wine does the premise that PN, Neb, and Ries most reflect the terroir hold up?

So take winemaking out of the picture. If one only tastes the grapes and not the wine does the premise that PN, Neb, and Ries most reflect the terroir hold up?

Brian: interesting approach, but I don't think it would satisfy anyone. These are WINE people you're talking to, and they're monomaniacal.

No, what might work though is having a 'controlled test' situation, where you have one winemaker making wine from the same grape but from several different "terroir-specific" locations, so you eliminate as many variables as possible.

I've actually seen this numerous times, and tasted the results, primarily in Burgundy, but also right here in Oregon and California. One of the most instructive for me was a single-vineyard single-vintage tasting of the St. Innocent Pinot Noirs from the Willamette Valley. And even though I was already a believe, it made an even more confirmed believer out of me that Pinot Noir most definitely reflects terroir, and quite specifically at that. (Of course, I've also had the ability to taste some of those same single-vineyard PNs over different vintages to see that they continue to be terroir reflective.).

Trouble is, in Burgundy, I've seen exactly the same terroir specificity attained by a winemaker working with different single vineyard Chardonnays...so where does that put us, back to zero?

Question: do you think the choice of barrel regimen is terroir?

From: http://www.terroir-france.com/theclub/meaning.htm

A " terroir " is a group of vineyards (or even vines) from the same region, belonging to a specific appellation, and sharing the same type of soil, weather conditions, grapes and wine making savoir-faire, which contribute to give its specific personality to the wine.

Terroir = Region + Appellation + Grapes + Wine making

Since barrel regimen is part of wine making, then, according to this definition, it is part of the terroir.

Including winemaking makes a nonsense of the whole idea of terroir, in my mind.