WTN: Donnhoff Great Growth

[David M. Bueker]

2007 Donnhoff Schlossbockelheimer Felsenberg Riesling Grosses Gewachs

I get tired just typing that!

Hot weather & refreshing Riesling=great match. This is showing some very deep minerality right now. When it was first released it was just a bit "pillowy" compared to its Dellchen and Hermannhohle brothers; now it has lost just a bit of fat & is very structured and long on the finish. Nothing opulent here, just fruit spritz over rocks. Great stuff.

Sounds fantastic, but then again Donnhoff GGs always are.

[David M. Bueker]

But Donnhoff is so passe. I really should drink it all up soon.

I really should drink it all up soon.

Over the next four years? It's not like the stuff will ever age, y'know.

(PS: You're a terrible influence, as usual - I just bought a bottle of this in between some other Riesling buys we'll drink through in fall or later.)

I cannot resist it. Was Grosse Gewachs supposed to simplify matters!!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_wine_classification

Blimey, take all night to figure out all the info.

[David M. Bueker]

If they did Grosses Gewachs the same way in all the regions, then perhaps it might have simplified things. Unfortunately we also have Erstes Gewachs and Erste Lage to muddy the waters.

Bob,

The Grosses Gewächs (Great Growth) designation is the VDPs attempt to provide a guide to the consumer as to which of the myriad of vineyards in Germany are the best (labelled without the village, only the vineyard.) It is not much different than the system used in Burgundy in that respect, although there is no Premier Cru classification in Germany. The VDP also decided to provide the consumer with more confidence about what they were buying by restricting the use of Grosses Gewächs to dry wines (and noble sweet wines) so there would be no surprises about the residual sugar content in a wine when opened. There are also restrictions including permitted yield, must weight, release time, hand harvesting, etc. The problem that arises (and Terry Theise has probably been the most vocal opponent of GG) is that the system completely leaves out wines that have discernable residual sugar (besides those from the Erste Lage desigation in the Mosel as David points out, and the noble sweet wines everywhere), the very same wines, it is argued, that Germany is best at producing. So how can Germany´s best wines be excluded from from it´s top designation?

In 1971 Germany adopted legislation concerned not with vineyard designation, but with harvest must weights as a measure of quality. In 1971 it made more sense to do so as high must weights were generally harder to achieve year in and out. Auslese was a rare occurence, a sign of a truly exceptional vintage. Now, because of global warming and indeed improved vineyard management, many of the wines labelled kabinett actually qualify as auslese and it is kabinett that is the rarity (which is why so many German wine fans love vintages like 2008 where the weights were down.)

The problem has been trying to reconcile these two measures of quality to fit with each other. It is often forgotten that the ORIGINAL reason for vinyard classification in Burgundy was not because each Cru produced a uniquely superior wine in regards to flavor and terroir (though of course we know that they do) but because these vineyards allowed the grapes to ripen fully on a consistent basis. In other words, great vineyards are great because in marginal climates they most always ripen grapes enough to produce good wine.

If the Germans were to take only this Burgundian approach (and Grosses Gewächs is a step in this direction, however indirect the path) there would be no more need for prädikat levels (which have become irrelevant and unrepresentative of what is in the bottle anyway) and I believe that the consumer would be less confused. Of course not everyone can agree about which vineyards are superior and preliminary attempts at classification have left people at odds.

In truly bad vintages (if that ever again occurs) there are still measures in place (A.P. panels and declassification options) that could still ensure consumer confidence.
The question about residual sugar is trickier, but not impossible (for example, no one seems to complain about the system used in Champagne.) Maybe that´s a discussion for another time.

Cheers,
Bill

[David M. Bueker]

Good summary Bill. I could dive into a rather detailed rant, but will confine myself to the subset of issues which drive me the craziest.

1. Grosses Gewachs may simplify things in the mind of the VDP, but unless one understands the regulations (not so common an occurence as we both know) it does exactly zero to help the consumer. All it means on the surface (as far as most consumers and many merchants go) is that the wines come in a heavier bottle and cost a little (sometimes a lot - e.g. Keller) more.

2. The idea that dry wine from the Niederhauser Hermannshohle is a "Great Growth" but that a Spatlese with residual sugar is not is so absurd that it is not even laughable. Grosses Gewachs (and its cousin Erstes Gewachs in the Rheingau) was developed around the current whims of fashion, where sweet is bad and dry is good. The Mosel Erste Lage almost makes sense as there are dry, of dry and sweet wines that carry the Erste Lage definition. It truly is a recognition of place rather than style.

3. The Champagne system for designation of sweetness may not be the recipient of complaints, but for the most part it's barely used. Brut is so predominant that Sec, Extra Brut, etc are all but irrelevant. The whole issue of sweetness in German Riesling is problematic because we all sense sweetness to different degrees. A Spatlese that I consider off-dry due to its crisp acidity may be intolerably sweet to someone else. That's why I have never advocated any kind of one-size-fits-all sweetness designation system. In any event, the issue of sweetness confusion being a barrier to German wine sales is a red herring in my opinion. Willi Schaefer, Helmut Donnhoff, Manfred Prum, etc., all seem to be able to sell their wines despite the fact that they have varying degrees of residual sugar. Perhaps it's the innate quality of the wine in the bottle that matters most to the consumer.

2. The idea that dry wine from the Niederhauser Hermannshohle is a "Great Growth" but that a Spatlese with residual sugar is not is so absurd that it is not even laughable. Grosses Gewachs (and its cousin Erstes Gewachs in the Rheingau) was developed around the current whims of fashion, where sweet is bad and dry is good. The Mosel Erste Lage almost makes sense as there are dry, of dry and sweet wines that carry the Erste Lage definition. It truly is a recognition of place rather than style.

That drives me crazy too, David (and let us not even ackowledge the 2nd wine provision.) The sweet bad\dry good issue within the GG classification almost seems to me to be initiated partly in response to the success of Austrian Riesling and perhaps even Australian Riesling in foreign markets (though the perception of that success and the reality are probably miles apart.) And even then, I don´t know if the VDP was thinking about the export market (in which they are generally at least partially focused on) or if GG was issued primarily for German customers (it would have been interesting if not excrutiatingly frustrating to be a fly on wall in those meetings.) One thing that the VDP would be wise not do is to confuse the tastes of German wine drinkers with that of the rest of the consumers around the world. I´m sure that you have a good idea of the ratio of dry to sweet wines available here. It remains a challenge to walk into a store (or even through the door of a Weingut) and find a good selection of wines with any sweetness (The notable exception is the Mosel, and even there, too many dry wines are made.) If I do manage to find a sweeter (balanced, of course) wine and bring it to dinner, there will be complaining, or at the very least deafening silence. Why? Now THAT is a good discussion for another time!

Cheers,

Bill

I was wondering what I was about to start when I posted above! So thanks very much Bill and David.
No need to go into the "does anyone understand German wine labels" thingy but doubt they will be any more enlightened when I try to explain all this when asked next Saturday when helping out downtown!! David`s Point 1 is spot on.

One thing I have noticed recently is that many shoppers are asking for Okanagan or Niagara Rieslings, which is understandable. When I try to steer them to Australia or Germany, I am left with non-committal response!. Some do seem interested in Alsace however.