Grapes That Really Make a Difference

You can have various blends of grapes that vary a fair bit - maybe 10% or so either way in any single component without showing a drastic difference in what you detect when you taste it - merlot, cab franc etc.

But then there are those grapes where a very small percentage added to the blend makes a very noticeable difference to the wine.

I'll offer a couple - the addition of Viognier to red Northern Rhone wines can affect them a lot - particularly in the nose. The other one is what gave rise to this post - I recently tasted a blended white wine that had 1% Muscat added to it and it gave it a Muscat nose that would make you swear that Muscat was a major component of the wine.

Any other nominees for grapes that seem to have a sensory affect way out of proportion to the amount added?

well, I'd add Gewurztraminer. Even a little adds a lot to a nose (for better or worse). So probably the crucial thing is that all three are at the top of the list of what most of us would list as "aromatic" varieties.

[David M. Bueker]

I would argue that Cab Franc can have a great effect.

A lot depends on what you are blending it into. Cabernet Sauvignon can overwhelm Sangiovese (see super Tuscans).

[Robin Garr]

Any other nominees for grapes that seem to have a sensory affect way out of proportion to the amount added?

I'll strongly concur with your Muscat nomination. I spoke on a recent TalkShoe about an Italian wine, made annually in Cividale in Friuli for a fund-raiser for a non-profit organization, that's a blend of *500* grape varieties.

The resulting wine is a light red in color ... and it smells and tastes like Muscat. Five hundred varieties, and that one dominates all the rest.

Symphony, along with the others mentioned.

And somewhat more of a niche, but those who know know what I'm talking about: Petite Sirah.

On the opposite side, a variety that holds its own character amazingly well, and tends to dominate whatever is added to it: Cabernet Sauvignon. No matter what you mix with it, the CS nature still holds forth. It can be influence, but it's hard to dominate it.

Ooh, very good.

I almost said Petit Verdot in my previous post, Randy! Through my various and sundry dabblings with some CA Meritage-style wines as well as Bordeaux clarets, I have seen some impressive changes in blends from very small additions of PV. There's a distinct floral/perfumey quality to it that makes it stand out as a blender grape. And in larger quantities I think it also has some soft weighty textural attributes that 'fatten' up and soften out a blend.

well, I'd add Gewurztraminer. Even a little adds a lot to a nose (for better or worse). So probably the crucial thing is that all three are at the top of the list of what most of us would list as "aromatic" varieties.

I'd second that - add a tiny portion of gewurztraminer to a bland pinot gris and, hey presto, the aromatics are enhanced, the taste is enhanced - it actually makes a more user friendly wine.

Maybe it's because we drink it so much, but our nominee is Montepulciano. When we order a Monte by the glass and somebody brings a substitute such as "house" Chianti, I spit it halfway across the floor.

Cinsault.

Fierce stuff.

The question could be asked about those wines that are traditionally a blend of many varietals - just what does each varietal add to the mix and would any of them fall into the class of 'influential varietals' (in terms of taste) that we are talking about.

The two multi-blend examples that come to mind are Chianti and Chateauneuf du Pape.

I think that Chianti has tended recently to reduce the number of components and to minimise use of the white varietals (malvasia Toscana and trebbiano). But what does canaiolo add?

And with CNduP, a blend of up to 13 varietals (5 of them white skinned) I think there has similarly beed a reduction in the minor varietals but one wonders if some of the other red components are 'influential (Cinsault and Syrah in particular).

what does canaiolo add?

Adds color and decreases cost.

one wonders if some of the other red components are 'influential (Cinsault and Syrah in particular).

I underwstand what you're getting at, but having tasted (fairly) extensively amongst the consituent varieties used in CdP, and having tasted very extensively with CdP and CdR wines with varying degrees of Syrah in the blends, there's no doubt in my mind that Syrah can be 'influential' in those blends. (Not necessary, mind you; just influential when used--i.e., the presence or absence makes a difference.)

And if we're going down this path, then we have to bring up Sauvignon Blanc/Semillon. No doubt in my mind that Semillon makes a significant difference when blended with SB.

And with CNduP, a blend of up to 13 varietals (5 of them white skinned) I think there has similarly beed a reduction in the minor varietals but one wonders if some of the other red components are 'influential (Cinsault and Syrah in particular).

If you query winemakers in the region, they'll generally tell you that: a) they use 5-6 of the varieties for the most part and b) the Grenache is there for the red fruit; the Mourvedre is there for the aging potential; the Syrah is there for the black fruit and the Cinsault is there to add some perfume. I rarely hear anyone talking about what gives the wines their meaty/gamey character, but then we all know that that comes from the Brett, don't we? I can't recall ever hearing anyone singing the praises of Bourboulenc or Terret Noir for what they bring to the wine (when they're present at all, it usually seems to be the result of a field blend)

Mark Lipton

having tasted a 100% Petit Verdot, this is not a grape that can do a one man show, ever.

Try a few more, Randy. Ripe petit verdot, i.e. PV from warmer climes than Médoc, can be outstanding. Abadía Retuerta and Dominio de Valdepusa are two prime Spanish examples.

Sauvignon blanc, OTOH, is noticeable at extremely low percentages.