Is it too soon?

Back in the 1970's, any French Bordeaux was made so that it shouldnt be drunk at least 7-10 years after bottling. Many California Cabernet Sauvignon's followed the same path. My teacher told me not to touch a French Bordeaux (in a decent year) for at least 8 years after it was bottled. I think with some of the 100% Cabs from California, that might have been stretched to 10-12 years.
Tannins were loved back then. People respected them and knew that if they wanted, those young nasty tannins would turn into a smooth soft feel.

In the past 5 or so years, I see this trend changing. California Cab's are ready in just a few years. And agast, some of the French Bordeaux's, the same!

It seems that the winemakers are adjusting to the consumer's palate. No longer is the consumer willing to wait 10 or more years to cellar a wine before its perfection. They want it NOW.

Has that impacted the overall quality of many of our wines? Or has it just hasten the time we take before we can drink them?

I think the technical definition of "ripe" has changed over the years. It's no longer just brix and acid. Seeds, stems and skins are analyzed. I think the grapes are being picked later now than they were years ago, thus producing softer wines that don't need as long to mature. I don't know if global warming has had any impact on this.

[David M. Bueker]

In the past 5 years or so? This trend for immediate readiness of California Cabs has been going on since the late (even mid) '90s. As for Bordeaux it's been since about 2000 (maybe earlier, but I would dispute that).

As for the consumer, I guess I have to wonder why they should have to wait? Not everyone has proper cellaring, or the disposable income to lay in a collection of bottles to tenderly care for, anticipating the perfect moment to uncork their well-aged gem.

Again (I had my judgement questioned last time I posted this, but I know what I was told) Emmanuel Cruse (Chateau D'Issan, Margaux) told me that in 1994 Bordeaux started harvesting based on phenolic ripeness, not sugar levels. IMO this was a sea-change for Bordeaux, and a good one. I understand that unripe tannins may never ripen, while phenolic ripeness (i.e. mature pips and riper tannins) will soften more easily. The "newer" Bordeaux may not go for 50 years, but they will still age gracefully over 20-30 years or more. When you are tasting young Bdx now that seem ready to drink, most will shut down for an extended period only to emerge as the "swans" that you are looking for. To use an old infantry analogy, "you may mistake young Bdx for old Bdx, but you will never mistake old Bdx for young Bdx"!

IMO "modern" fruit forward grand cru and top bourgeois Bordeaux with ripe tannins is still too young to drink at less than 10 years in most cases because of invasive oak flavours and, furthermore, a lot of right bank châteaux have gone so far in the blueberry milk-shake direction that the wines no longer taste like Bordeaux.

Will they converge in style with more traditionally made Bordeaux after greater ageing as I have seen claimed for "modern" versus "traditional" Rioja and Barolo? Only time will tell and I am unlikely to find out because my Bordeaux buying tapered off sharply after the millenium with 2004 being the last vintage from which I have any grands crus.

The change might be seen from a slightly different POV. Perhaps it is winery owners who see that they could make a wine that will taste good (in the tasting room) in 8 years and sell for $100, or a wine that will taste good in 2 years and sell for $90. The dollar figures are arbitrary.

If a wine is being sold in a tasting room, without any real food, a more cocktail like drink has appeal to many. If it can be sold for nearly the same $ in 1/4 the time, this is good business. For the record, this is not my personal preference in red wines.

So, unless a winery has a reputation with collectors who will pay now for a wine that will taste good later, producing wines that will taste good early is sound business, if not the best for the wine.

This my observation/theory coming from a winery that makes wines that can all be drunk within 3 years. The heaviest red we make is a Syrah. The rest are Pinot Noir, various whites and sparkling wine, which is the outlier, since our NV normally ages 3 years on the lees.

(Snip)
In the past 5 or so years, I see this trend changing. California Cab's are ready in just a few years. And agast, some of the French Bordeaux's, the same!

It seems that the winemakers are adjusting to the consumer's palate. No longer is the consumer willing to wait 10 or more years to cellar a wine before its perfection. They want it NOW.

Has that impacted the overall quality of many of our wines? Or has it just hasten the time we take before we can drink them?

Somehow I do not see this vast change in Bordeaux. Think, for example, of many of the wines from the 2005 vintage that will not attain their peak for anywhere from 15-30 years.

Best
Rogov

Ron,

As you know, its very hard to generalize. First Growths, Ridge MB, Montelena*, etc. can still go 25-50 years. Many (most) you shouldn't touch for at least 10-15 years.

That said, I totally agree with David B. the trend toward younger drinking wines has been going on a LOT longer than 5 years. It think its all about the economics as Andrew suggests.


*Montelena has even changed to be a bit more drinkable young, IMHO.

In the last couple of weeks Nils Venge, & Doug Fletcher have both been to the house for dinner. They both said they see a trend towards the older style of cab developing in the market place. Less ripeness, less alcohol, less oak, a style they both prefer on a personal level. They both agreed that global warming will keep ripeness in grapes a little higher indefinitely everywhere in the world.

When we talk about Bordeaux, we have to be careful. Bordeaux is a mighty big place and while the classified growths capture most of the attention, they are by far the smallest in the category of what is produced in Bordeaux.

Much of the humbler producers and properties produce wines that never see a piece of wood, young or old, and most are designed specifically to be consumed quickly---or at least within five years at most.

The majority of people looking for those quick-n-easy Bordeaux are not exactly shopping in the First Growth aisles anyhoo.

Even in the top levels, though, Bordeaux is encompassing enough to accommodate the fruity/over-ripe and 200% oak jam monsters as well as the old traditional, and everyhing in between. The art is in the looking.

Same thing in California. Not all Pinots are Pinot Syrahs. Not all Cabs are boneless blobs. And even Chardonnay runs a pretty serious gamut of flavor styles and profiles these days.

It's usually not nearly as monolithic as people try to sum it up to be.

[Jenise]

In the last couple of weeks Nils Venge, & Doug Fletcher have both been to the house for dinner. They both said they see a trend towards the older style of cab developing in the market place. Less ripeness, less alcohol, less oak, a style they both prefer on a personal level. They both agreed that global warming will keep ripeness in grapes a little higher indefinitely everywhere in the world.

Lou, my first reaction to Ron's post was an objection to the idea that there was one consumer. Back in the 70's wine had a relatively narrow following. That consumer was a patient person who enjoyed all the advantages that tannins bring to fine wine. In the 90's everybody became a winedrinker and something like 90% of all wine sold is consumed within 48 hours of purchase by people who prefer soda pop to water. The industry started catering to that person. What you report might suggest is that newbie palates are maturing on a basis broad enough for an industry-wide regrouping. Good news, and though I think there will always be two consumers, our group might be getting larger.

In the last couple of weeks Nils Venge, & Doug Fletcher have both been to the house for dinner. They both said they see a trend towards the older style of cab developing in the market place. Less ripeness, less alcohol, less oak, a style they both prefer on a personal level. They both agreed that global warming will keep ripeness in grapes a little higher indefinitely everywhere in the world.

Lou, my first reaction to Ron's post was an objection to the idea that there was one consumer. Back in the 70's wine had a relatively narrow following. That consumer was a patient person who enjoyed all the advantages that tannins bring to fine wine. In the 90's everybody became a winedrinker and something like 90% of all wine sold is consumed within 48 hours of purchase by people who prefer soda pop to water. The industry started catering to that person. What you report might suggest is that newbie palates are maturing on a basis broad enough for an industry-wide regrouping. Good news, and though I think there will always be two consumers, our group might be getting larger.

I just hope you're correct. Your hypothesis is well reasoned.

I think it's obvious that some wines in Bordeaux and California are made in a more approachable style than they were years ago (I'm talking about the wines that people generally consider for aging, not the Bdx AC or Central Valley wines and the like, those always were made for immediate consumption/approachability). Some claim that despite that, they will age as well, though that hasn't been my personal (unscientific) experience. But I think whether that is better or worse depends upon personal taste. I liked aged wines, but don't begrudge those that prefer more primary experiences.

I do think hard and fast rules are iffy. Rules that say drink Bordeaux after 7 or 8 years especially- sounds like a WS drinking window, a formula for popping a cork when the wine is REALLY closed. In good to great vintages, with most classified Bdx I generally try to try in first 2 years, then ignore till at least 15 (excepting Matt's 10 year looks). Of course, every vintage is different, some shut down hard, others less so.