# "Natural Wines"



## gamble (May 19, 2018)

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/15/has-wine-gone-bad-organic-biodynamic-natural-wine

Interesting but long(!) read. Basically "lets throw away thousands of years of learning to make something cloudy,sour and trendy"


----------



## Scooter68 (May 21, 2018)

Yeah, kinda hard to get very excited about something that the tongue wants to reject at first taste - even with some 'experience' in tasting that 'wine.'

As to leaving everything in... sorry but that just makes no sense. After all we aren't making a 'health-food' beverage so those bits and pieces don't add to the enjoyable flavor. Especially in light of what we know about seeds and other parts of the grape or fruit.

It almost sounds like the idea of "If it tastes nasty, it must be good for you" medicine.


----------



## JohnT (May 22, 2018)

This is too funny!!! 

*"But almost more remarkable than the dish itself was the drink that accompanied it: a glass of cloudy, noticeably sour white wine from a virtually unknown vineyard in France’s Loire Valley, which was available at the time for about £8 a bottle" .... This was a so-called natural wine – made without any pesticides, chemicals or preservatives – the product of a movement that has triggered the biggest conflict in the world of wine for a generation.
*
This type of thing always reminds me of the old story "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Here they start off saying it is cloudy and sour. But hey, look the other way... it is natural. 

The plague, forest fires, hurricanes, hoards of locust are also natural. It doesn't mean that they are good things.


----------



## jgmillr1 (May 22, 2018)

Sounds like there is at least a market of idiots if a batch of wine goes south.


----------



## bkisel (May 22, 2018)

Thanks guys... After reading your replies I've decided not to waste my time reading the article.


----------



## stickman (May 22, 2018)

There are so many factors involved. I think natural wine has its place, but making it taste good requires a winemaker with a high degree of skill and knowledge. If you don't know what you are doing, a natural wine with all of the microbial activity, will end up with more chemical contaminants than the wine made with sulfites.


----------



## Ajmassa (May 22, 2018)

bkisel said:


> Thanks guys... After reading your replies I've decided not to waste my time reading the article.



It still a good read. Well written and very detailed. But like mostly everyone else who read it, i probably said to myself “you gotta be effing kidding me?!” multiple times throughout. 
One of which was this,
[David Harvey, of the London importer Raeburn Fine Wines, recalled that “many wine professionals and writers pooh-poohed the whole thing early on. They assumed because they knew conventional wines, they knew it all.”]. Yea I guess evaluating bitter cloudy garage wine is a new requirement for them!
Smh
The emperor’s new clothes is a perfect analogy btw.


----------



## Scooter68 (May 22, 2018)

Let's see, Take a bunch of grapes, mash them up, put them in a bottle with an airlock and comeback in 6 months and bottle it. Sounds about like the basic process. 

No equipment, no preservatives, no worries........ yeah right.


----------



## JohnT (May 22, 2018)

just one more view point. This is embraced return to 6,000 year old winemaking techniques.

While we are at it, why not return to 6,000 year old government, or 6,000 year old food, or 6,000 year old medicine? 

The good old days were not so good!


----------



## sour_grapes (May 22, 2018)

My friend has this same approach (although his wines clear well enough through aging). As you know, this year was my first crush, so we are making wine from the same grapes. We agreed he would do it _au naturel_, while I use all the adjuncts and chemicals I please, and we will compare them later!


----------



## Ajmassa (May 22, 2018)

sour_grapes said:


> My friend has this same approach (although his wines clear well enough through aging). As you know, this year was my first crush, so we are making wine from the same grapes. We agreed he would do it _au naturel_, while I use all the adjuncts and chemicals I please, and we will compare them later!



Just how natural did he go?
Natural yeast- no nutrients- no So2 - no nothing???
I think I know who’s wine will be better. Oh wait never mind. According to that article “better” is subjective and any beatnik can deem the natural one better. But to the rest of us in reality I’m looking forward to hear about the final results.


----------



## sour_grapes (May 22, 2018)

Yup, he is not adding or changing a thing. Nothing. (And this was a high brix batch!)


----------



## Scooter68 (May 22, 2018)

Is he racking at all or just leaving in the original fermentation vessel. Does he intend to bottle all the sediment as well or is he doing some sort of racking/filtering.


----------



## Slappy (May 23, 2018)

80 year old Italian neighbor of mine does wild ferments on grenache/shiraz blends and 90 days from pressing he bottles his wine only racking it off the sediment. I've drank a few of them some very average but a couple have been quite drinkable in their own way. He'd never change how he does things.
When I racked my grenache last week I had a stray gallon or so that I bottled as it was pretty clear 8 weeks after pressing. Don't know what it will be like in 6 months but it's clean and fruity right now so I'll have a bottle every week til it's gone. I used a proper yeast though so guess it's not truly 'natural'. The rest is on oak and got a dose of sulfite though. Maybe I'll save one of the unadulterated bottles for a year just to see what it's like.


----------



## cmason1957 (May 23, 2018)

Natural wines, what an odd term. They use yeast, just not specialized yeast. They end up with sulfites in the wine, you can't avoid them, they are a natural byproduct of fermentation. 

They don't filter, meh, who cares that just makes your wine shine. 

I am surprised that folks think this is good, when it is noticeably sub-par to what you can get with minimal interventions. But each to his own.


----------



## Scooter68 (May 23, 2018)

Certainly agree cmason - Why would you set out to make a poorer wine just so you can do it the "Old Natural way?" 

*It's like going to the doc to get shoulder surgery and saying - Yeah doc, I know you can do this shoulder surgery laparoscopically, but really, I'd rather you just cut me all around the shoulder and give me a nice big scar along with a longer recovery time. *


----------



## sour_grapes (May 23, 2018)

Scooter68 said:


> Is he racking at all or just leaving in the original fermentation vessel. Does he intend to bottle all the sediment as well or is he doing some sort of racking/filtering.


Good point. He racks off the gross lees and then the fine lees as needed as the wine clears.


----------



## BernardSmith (May 23, 2018)

I make "country wines" and meads and don't make wines from grapes so my opinion here (as always) is quite contrarian. I think we are missing the point that is being made by those wine makers who have adopted a less industrialized /engineered approach. Their thing is to bring out the flavors and the aromas of the grapes themselves rather than to produce the flavors and aromas that are expected of those wines. So, it is not going back to the past to ask a doctor to be bled or to have the butcher do the surgery. This is about a group of people who want to focus on the flavor the fruit has and not in "manufacturing" flavors that come from labs (see also Bianca Bosker's Cork Dork, Penguin 2017)


----------



## Scooter68 (May 24, 2018)

In all honesty Bernard I think that most of us are on the same page. We hobbyist wine makers are looking for more control of our wines, to craft them our way.
My point in my comments is more along the line of taking advantage of modern day methods to the extent we choose along with modifying quantities of fruit, targeting the ABV to our liking and Still coming up with a wine that is generally, outwardly indistinguishable from commercial wines.

What I saw in that article were several points about cloudy wines with sediment and 'unusual' flavors and aromas. If those things are considered advantages to some, so be it, but: but to many of us I think we just want to have more control over the wine and a wine that is still attractive in the glass.

I guess one way would be to say that to some extent the article painted a picture of those natural wines being almost like that first health drink I was first given - tasted a bit nasty even though it was supposed to be good for me. I agree that some beverages today bear only a slight resemblance to the fruit name on that label. I will even admit to drinking the occasional 'wine coolers' that claim to be one berry or another or some fruit and yet seem to be more of that old DOW Chemical Company line - "Better living through Chemicals" (Or was that through Science) ( That line always came to me when I was desperate for something hot and resorted to making a cup of instant coffee with non-dairy creamer powder and an artificial sweetener)

At the risk of rambling - I recall taking trips to historic villages and tasting food prepared in the same way as it was 'back in the day.' Perhaps, that's what the natural wine movement is about. I just think that like that historic village food offering, If it has a good flavor great, but if it has some strange flavors or looks, maybe that isn't a great thing to bring back.


----------



## BernardSmith (May 24, 2018)

Right, No disagreement but my sense is that those wine makers are not creating "strange flavors" or strange "looks" , they are simply focusing on the fruit they have and the indigenous yeasts and experimenting with the results in much the same way that say, a woman who has worn "makeup" all her life chooses to forgo the chemicals and colors and scents and enter the world au naturale. Acquaintances may be surprised and may not recognize her but those who really know her may admit that her natural beauty by far is better than any manufactured "beauty" that comes from a factory controlled by chemists and engineers. This is not an attempt to go back in time or to play make believe. It is, I would argue an attempt to strip away the artifice and the manufactured nature of what could be a delicious wine absent the engineered manipulations of folk in lab coats creating more and more chemicals to allow vintners to manufacture their wines.


----------



## Scooter68 (May 24, 2018)

True. Sometimes all that 'protection' masks the natural flavors. Much as I prefer wild Blackberries and Wild Black Raspberries over their domesticated relatives. And it may be that those tasting those wines are a bit on the snobbish side and are 'detecting' things stripped out of many commercial wines. Whatever the case, if that natural nature of their wines is more enjoyable to them - good for them. I'll just focus on trying not to screw up my batches with off tastes created by imbalances in my must or 'sensitive' yeasts.

(Maybe I should change my quote line to: Instant coffee + Non-dairy Creamer + Artificial Sweetener = 
"Better living through Chemicals" I don't think so. )


----------



## stickman (May 25, 2018)

At some point people have to agree on what "natural" is. What is considered manipulation? Do we have to go back to a clay pot? Is glass and stainless acceptable? What about in the vineyard, can we drop fruit to limit yields? Is there a certain type of trellis that is acceptable or unacceptable? Clones and root-stock? Seems like everything is manipulated to some extent.


----------



## balatonwine (May 25, 2018)

As Gene Autry said to his horse Trigger: Whoa!!!!!

I wander how many people criticizing "natural wines" have actually tried that many. Or are just bashing based on this article alone?


----------



## balatonwine (May 25, 2018)

Scooter68 said:


> What I saw in that article were several points about cloudy wines with sediment and 'unusual' flavors and aromas.



First of all, this was an article from "The Guardian". A news source known for its click bait, even when they report on a serious topic. So of course they would start with "cloudy wine". But most of the types of wine that the article is actually describing is neither cloudy or has "off flavors" if properly made. The trick is, of course, that making wine while eshewing modern chemicals, et al, is more difficult and more likely to fail. But the results can be quite interesting.



Scooter68 said:


> but to many of us I think we just want to have more control over the wine and a wine that is still attractive in the glass.



I admit, that many here are hobbyist and want to control as much as possible in their wine making to create a wine that is, perhaps, familiar to them, and comparable to available commercially. That is fine. No problem. But to assume a wine made without doing this amount of control is "unattractive" is questionable. I have had some very amazing so called "natural wines". Some were only "okay". Which is exactly what I can say about "modern" made wines. In short, beware judging too much until you actually try some. 



Scooter68 said:


> I guess one way would be to say that to some extent the article painted a picture of those natural wines being almost like that first health drink I was first given - tasted a bit nasty even though it was supposed to be good for me.



I did not get that overall impression per se. Rather, the idea of making wines like this is to make the wine making process better for the yeast, the wine itself, you indirectly by fewer pesticide use, polluting soils and water for example (i.e. helping the environment).



Scooter68 said:


> At the risk of rambling - I recall taking trips to historic villages and tasting food prepared in the same way as it was 'back in the day.' Perhaps, that's what the natural wine movement is about. I just think that like that historic village food offering, If it has a good flavor great, but if it has some strange flavors or looks, maybe that isn't a great thing to bring back.



Agreed. So you tried some traditional food. But have you actually tried enough traditionally made wines, from a variety of producers to judge their actual quality? Or are you judging without experience?


----------



## balatonwine (May 25, 2018)

JohnT said:


> just one more view point. This is embraced return to 6,000 year old winemaking techniques.
> 
> While we are at it, why not return to 6,000 year old government, or 6,000 year old food, or 6,000 year old medicine?
> 
> The good old days were not so good!



One can say that the modern fuel injected engine is far superior to engines that came before.

But there are many people who love and restore hit and miss engines. Or old cars. Or even steam engines.

Everything does not have to be modern. Some people like living and working with old technology. For many reasons. Personally, I prefer hand tools to power tools. Grew up enamored by Roy Underhills Woodwright's Shop. Something old is also not necessarily inferior. Simply different.

In short: Each to their own. Everyone has their own preferences. For example, some people here might have someone stomp with their feet to crush some grapes. That is a real 6,000 year old wine making method. Nice. But, I personally would never do that. I prefer a modern crusher. But that's just me.


----------



## JohnT (May 25, 2018)

balatonwine said:


> As Gene Autry said to his horse Trigger: Whoa!!!!!



Don't you mean... "Whoa!!! Roy Rogers wants to hang me for stealing his horse"?? LOL


but seriously,

@balatonwine , I think that you are making the best point of all here. I have to admit that I am guilty of allowing the author's judgment of the wine override my own judgment. You are right, who am I to judge when I have not actually tasted it.

Thanks for the reality check!


----------



## Johnd (May 25, 2018)

Been doing some digging around about "natural" wines, and found an interesting article from Decanter which, in the apparent absence of an official definition, provided the following general criteria :

"After collating the responses, we came up with our own _*Decanter* _charter of quality for natural wines which we used as a basis for entry:

• Vineyards farmed organically or biodynamically – certification was strongly preferred, but uncertified wines were accepted
• Hand-harvested only
• Fermentation with indigenous (wild) yeasts
• No enzymes
• No additives added (such as acid, tannin, colouring) other than SO2
• SO2 levels no higher than 70mg/l total
• Unfined, and no (or light) filtration
• No other heavy manipulation (such as spinning cone, reverse osmosis, cryoextraction, rapid-finishing, Ultraviolet C irradiation)"

Seems to me, that based on these criteria, some very fine wines are produced, and several vineyards that I've visited and regularly buy wine from produce exceptional wines under these criteria, particularly when the grapes come out of the field just right. For me, the only production methods that are troublesome at home are risk aversion in using wild yeast and my desire to use enzymes for extraction, and have had plenty wines that haven't been acid adjusted. Lots of vineyards are farming organically and biodynamically, and harvesting by hand, processes which I'm in favor of, but it's not that important when buying grapes.

Guess my point really is that using the criteria above, natural wine doesn't need to be tart, sour or cloudy, nor does it have to be sulfite free, though I suspect that the natural wine "purists" would disagree with some of the Decanter criteria.


----------



## Americanhooch (Jun 6, 2018)

I'm with balatonwine on this one. 

I'm just starting to explore the area of "natural" wine (I think that's a controversial term even within the category). But for a long time, Coturri has been up there with my favorite winemakers — even higher if you factor in the affordability of their baseline Red. Coturri is a bit on the extreme end of the "don't mess around with additives or fancy modern techniques" range, but folks like Harrington Wines or Littorai which are on the more _minimalist_ end of the spectrum also do some really great stuff. 

That said, I've tasted some of the things in the "natural" category that just aren't to my liking, so this is not some sort of thing that I want everyone following and we should be no means look down on folks who do things with modern techniques. If they make great wine, that's all that really matters. Winemakers are experimenting with reducing the chemicals and intervention and many are getting good results — and that's a good thing. 

Now, on my own stuff, I ain't nearly confident or talented enough to even think about going down this road!


----------



## REDRUM (Jun 7, 2018)

'Natural wine' is a very broad category. There is some that is cloudy and tart - but, then again, there are some that like wines that are cloudy and tart (think a Belgian Lambic beer or a farmhouse cider). There is some that is oxidised and cruddy yet sells for $40 a bottle or something because it's cool.
But there is also some very, very good natural wine around. If the grapes are properly ripened with good tannin / acid / sugar balance, free of disease, and properly handled with care, they should contain all the ingredients necessary for production as a high-quality wine without the need for additives of any kind. That might be one of the appeals for some people - that you have to get everything right, with no shortcuts, and so it promotes good practice in the vineyard & winery.
Recently I had dinner at a restaurant that paired a degustation menu with natural wines. .. a couple were way off my tastes, a couple were bloody delicious and presented flavours I hadn't encountered before. That's reason enough for me to think they have a place, even if they're not something I'd buy regularly.
As for the 6,000-year-old wine argument ... surely some of it was pretty good, otherwise you wouldn't have the ancient poets rhapsodizing about it ..


----------



## CK55 (Jun 7, 2018)

REDRUM said:


> 'Natural wine' is a very broad category. There is some that is cloudy and tart - but, then again, there are some that like wines that are cloudy and tart (think a Belgian Lambic beer or a farmhouse cider). There is some that is oxidised and cruddy yet sells for $40 a bottle or something because it's cool.
> But there is also some very, very good natural wine around. If the grapes are properly ripened with good tannin / acid / sugar balance, free of disease, and properly handled with care, they should contain all the ingredients necessary for production as a high-quality wine without the need for additives of any kind. That might be one of the appeals for some people - that you have to get everything right, with no shortcuts, and so it promotes good practice in the vineyard & winery.
> Recently I had dinner at a restaurant that paired a degustation menu with natural wines. .. a couple were way off my tastes, a couple were bloody delicious and presented flavours I hadn't encountered before. That's reason enough for me to think they have a place, even if they're not something I'd buy regularly.
> As for the 6,000-year-old wine argument ... surely some of it was pretty good, otherwise you wouldn't have the ancient poets rhapsodizing about it ..


Yep


----------



## Venatorscribe (Jun 7, 2018)

Scooter68 said:


> Yeah, kinda hard to get very excited about something that the tongue wants to reject at first taste - even with some 'experience' in tasting that 'wine.'
> 
> As to leaving everything in... sorry but that just makes no sense. After all we aren't making a 'health-food' beverage so those bits and pieces don't add to the enjoyable flavor. Especially in light of what we know about seeds and other parts of the grape or fruit.
> 
> It almost sounds like the idea of "If it tastes nasty, it must be good for you" medicine.


So true. It is taking us back to medieval monastery days.


----------



## BernardSmith (Jun 7, 2018)

Venatorscribe said:


> So true. It is taking us back to medieval monastery days.



But you know, that argument - and the claim that some make that we are going back to a time when we knew nothing about fermentation - a claim that the large breweries tend to levy against craft brewers and their beers... might apply to some brewers but then their are people like Pat McGovern and breweries like Dogfish Head who do know their arse from their elbow.. I am sure that deep knowledge applies, if not to all then to many "natural" wine makers too.


----------



## Scooter68 (Jun 7, 2018)

The issue is that some read Natural and they believe that means VERY natural, all the stuff left in, other than gross lees and ZERO additives. I know that isn't a truly accurate representation of what most(?) natural wine makers are trying to do.

Bottom line, if the wine isn't tasty, what the point. I always think back to those westerns in the saloon. The cowboy downs his glass of whiskey and through a breathless moment speaks "Smooooth" Yeah, right. I drink wine to enjoy the flavors, but I cannot imagine the appeal of flavors that are off or repelling to most taste buds. 
To each his own variety but, lets not get silly. People did get sick and die from bad brews, bad food etc in the 'good ol days.' If your wine making desires are to abstain from all the chemicals, that's fine but that can also include some risks in terms of how long it will keep or what 'interesting' flavors will be there. It's a choice but no, thanks, within reason I'll stick to more modern methods of wine making. The OP's article points to some wines the, while natural, are not necessarily all that desirable to the average wine drinker.

If you haven't taken time to read the article you really should do so BEFORE posting responses. Some basic, and admittedly more strident comments from it are posted below. I believe that the majority of participants on this forum are trying to return from the overly modernized wines and return to more natural wine production BUT without reverting to the more extreme ends of the spectrum. I may be wrong but judging from the comments I've seen in the sections of this forum, I think that's not a far fetched interpretation. (My forum readings are 99% from Beginners Section, General Wine making, Recipes, and Country Fruit Wine making)


Pro Modern:

"...a glass of cloudy, noticeably sour white wine from a virtually unknown vineyard in France’s Loire Valley..."


“The weird and wonderful flavours will assault your senses with all sorts of wacky scents and quirky flavours.” 


"Once you know what to look for, natural wines are easy to spot: they tend to be smellier, cloudier, juicier, more acidic and generally truer to the actual taste of grape than traditional wines. In a way, they represent a return to the core elements that made human beings fall in love with wine when we first began making it, around 6,000 years ago. Advocates of natural wine believe that nearly everything about the £130bn modern wine industry – from the way it is made, to the way critics police what counts as good or bad – is ethically, ecologically and aesthetically wrong."


But among wine critics, there is a deep suspicion that the natural wine movement is intent on tearing down the norms and hierarchies that they have dedicated their lives to upholding. The haziness of what actually counts as natural wine is particularly maddening to such traditionalists. “There is no legal definition of natural wine,” Michel Bettane, one of France’s most influential wine critics, told me. “It exists because it proclaims itself so. It is a fantasy of marginal producers.” Robert Parker, perhaps the world’s most powerful wine critic, has called natural wine an “undefined scam”.


Pro Natural:'

"Yet, as natural wine advocates point out, the way most wine is produced today looks nothing like this picture-postcard vision. Vineyards are soaked with pesticide and fertiliser to protect the grapes, which are a notoriously fragile crop. In 2000, a French government report noted that vineyards used 3% of all agricultural land, but 20% of the total pesticides. In 2013, a study found traces of pesticides in 90% of wines available at French supermarkets."


----------



## Zintrigue (Jun 8, 2018)

balatonwine said:


> As Gene Autry said to his horse Trigger: Whoa!!!!!
> 
> I wander how many people criticizing "natural wines" have actually tried that many. Or are just bashing based on this article alone?



I'm kind of in the camp that says "cloudy and sour" are not desirable traits. Like earlier posts said, fine wines can be produced "naturally," but to tout cloudy and sour as "natural" when there's fine products alongside it, I think there needs to be better labeling going on. Perhaps "Rough." haha


----------



## Scooter68 (Jun 8, 2018)

With regards to accuracy of the original story, one can only trust the comments of the writer based on their credentials, if any. But trying to be open minded, I consider at least one wine I love to be a little uncommon - Tart Cherry. I don't know that everyone would love just walking out to a tart (Pie) Cherry tree and feasting on those tart things,.... BUT I love them. Likewise my Tart cherry wine is pretty doggone tart and perhaps not something everyone would like. But I'll certainly admit that I may not be as open-minded as some folks - personally I've never had a red wine I liked, I love my strong fruit wines but not red grape wines. Just my preference. 
Likewise if one is used to drinking a certain variety of wine made with modern methods and they find that the product of a more 'natural' approach is not to their liking, I'm not going to question their judgement.


----------



## Slappy (Jun 10, 2018)

I very recently (last weekend) attended a venue here in South Australia that is well known for only having natural wines and using local produce in their kitchen etc. It's called the Aristologist at Summertown. Here I tried several wines including a light red that was reminiscent of grenache thats just starting to settle after ferment, an extended skin contact white wine that was quite interesting. I quite liked that one and would describe it as cidery as it had an apple/cidery tang to it that was actually pleasant. Also had a lightly sparkling white that seemed to be bottle fermented that had similar characteristics. All of those wines were slightly cloudy, a little cidery and had some volatile acidity however they were quite drinkable and I enjoyed them. I wouldn't make 300 bottles of like wine at home though. All seemed to be fermented, racked off gross lees and bottled straight from there to preserve all that 'naturalness' I guess. One wine stood out to me though. As soon as I was passed a glass I picked it as an Adelaide Hills Shiraz and I was correct. It was very fresh, young and vibrant and obviously had no oak. It was a bit thin with no real length but there was great berry fruit straight up and some tannins at the end, it was the mid palate that lacked any punch. This was a wine I'd happily drink every week, and with some aging and oak you'd probably have something more recognisable to someone who drinks commercial wine. Which is kinda what I'm aiming for as a winemaker.
I won't be mucking around with native yeasts as I think it's too risky and pure strain yeasts are cheap insurance. But I like the idea of minimal intervention and using biodynamic or organic grapes. I bottled a few left overs when I racked my 2018 Grenache the other week and this was 'natural' apart from the use of a commercial yeast. It is now all gone as everyone couldn't stop drinking it! The rest is getting some oak and very minimal sulfite additions while aging but that's it. I have some of the best quality grapes in the world at my doorstep so can be very choosey what I use. Which I think goes a long way to making good wines without using any adjuncts. Personally I do see the value in these natural wines even just as a counterpoint to the over commercialised mass produced stuff on most shelves. I think it has it's place and isn't simply difference for the sake of difference. Either way I can see it being more common in the markets where it's produced as shipping and storage would be the enemy.


----------



## susieqz (Jun 10, 2018)

thanks, slap. it'd good to hear semi natural may work.


----------



## REDRUM (Jun 11, 2018)

Sums up my thoughts perfectly Slappy. 
There's room for all these approaches as far as I'm concerned, being dogmatic (about either 'natural' winemaking or technoscientific winemaking) does nobody any favours.



Slappy said:


> I very recently (last weekend) attended a venue here in South Australia that is well known for only having natural wines and using local produce in their kitchen etc. It's called the Aristologist at Summertown. Here I tried several wines including a light red that was reminiscent of grenache thats just starting to settle after ferment, an extended skin contact white wine that was quite interesting. I quite liked that one and would describe it as cidery as it had an apple/cidery tang to it that was actually pleasant. Also had a lightly sparkling white that seemed to be bottle fermented that had similar characteristics. All of those wines were slightly cloudy, a little cidery and had some volatile acidity however they were quite drinkable and I enjoyed them. I wouldn't make 300 bottles of like wine at home though. All seemed to be fermented, racked off gross lees and bottled straight from there to preserve all that 'naturalness' I guess. One wine stood out to me though. As soon as I was passed a glass I picked it as an Adelaide Hills Shiraz and I was correct. It was very fresh, young and vibrant and obviously had no oak. It was a bit thin with no real length but there was great berry fruit straight up and some tannins at the end, it was the mid palate that lacked any punch. This was a wine I'd happily drink every week, and with some aging and oak you'd probably have something more recognisable to someone who drinks commercial wine. Which is kinda what I'm aiming for as a winemaker.
> I won't be mucking around with native yeasts as I think it's too risky and pure strain yeasts are cheap insurance. But I like the idea of minimal intervention and using biodynamic or organic grapes. I bottled a few left overs when I racked my 2018 Grenache the other week and this was 'natural' apart from the use of a commercial yeast. It is now all gone as everyone couldn't stop drinking it! The rest is getting some oak and very minimal sulfite additions while aging but that's it. I have some of the best quality grapes in the world at my doorstep so can be very choosey what I use. Which I think goes a long way to making good wines without using any adjuncts. Personally I do see the value in these natural wines even just as a counterpoint to the over commercialised mass produced stuff on most shelves. I think it has it's place and isn't simply difference for the sake of difference. Either way I can see it being more common in the markets where it's produced as shipping and storage would be the enemy.


----------



## Obbnw (May 28, 2019)

Johnd said:


> • Vineyards farmed organically or biodynamically – certification was strongly preferred, but uncertified wines were accepted
> • Hand-harvested only
> • Fermentation with indigenous (wild) yeasts
> • No enzymes
> ...



I was searching for natural wine and found this thread - with the exception of wild yeasts my wine would qualify as natural. I'm afraid of the wild yeast but if I have a good crop of grapes this year I might experiment.

I do have the benefit of growing my own grapes and picking them when I think they should be picked. My harvest stretched out over almost 4 weeks. As far as acid balancing etc I just figured I'll get what I get. The filtering, fining etc seemed like a pain and they seemed clear pretty well on their own. I do get some sediment in the bottles, but not much. Plus I don't plan on aging any of the wine I make so I'm not worried about long term stability. At the rate I'm going I won't have any left by harvest time.

I'm a little surprised at the mostly negative response - I'd have guessed there would be more hobby type people looking to simplify but I couldn't imagine being a commercial operation and taking the risk.

Anyway - I'd love to know anyone's experience with the totally "natural" route. I put natural in quotes because I kind of agree with one of the posts above about what is natural.


----------



## BernardSmith (May 28, 2019)

Hi obbnw - and welcome. I am simply a hobbyist and a maker of country wines and meads rather than someone who makes wines from grapes but my sense is that the appellation "natural" has as much to do with the idea that the focus of such wine making is on the fruit itself and on the terroir (the characteristics that result form the particulars of the location) rather than on processes and additives. The risks that such wine makers take - I think - they view as the cost of truly embracing the fruit grown. To disguise or mask the flavors of a wine by using lab cultured yeast or processes that "artificially" remove or enhance color, flavor, sweetness, mouthfeel, aroma or alcoholic concentration they view as processes more akin to factory rather than "natural" production. Their use of the term "natural" suggests to me not some kind of mistaken understanding of the difference between the natural world and the world of artifice and human activity but a real desire to treat the fruit, *as it is, *as heart and center of their wines. While brewers may claim that they only make the wort while it is the yeast that makes the beer, makers of natural wines might add that it is these grapes hosting those yeast that make this wine.


----------



## Obbnw (May 28, 2019)

When you make your fruit wines do you add sugar? I started making wine with Blackberries and was amazed at how much sugar was added. If I ever get a good crop again I may try blackberry wine without adding sugar (or greatly reduce the sugar added). I saw somewhere where you could freeze the juice and let it partially thaw to increase the sugar percentage.

But it's unlikely I'll get a good crop again. I have a very narrow lot with have the blackberries on the south side of my house but the neighbors yard (lot line 10' from my house) has turned into an overgrown mess with a whole line of weed siberian elm trees that significantly shade my yard. Plus the bugs have taken a toll.... Got 40-50lbs of blackberries 6 or so years ago and less then 10 last year with a pretty linear decline in production. So it goes. 

On the plus side - the failure of my blackberries along with my neighbor on the north doing a huge addition which removed a huge tree (providing a sunny spot for grapes) inspired me to plant grapes for wine.


----------



## Scooter68 (May 29, 2019)

At the risk of Stirring an already well stirred pot but answering the question about sugar (and other additives) I make country wines as well and despite wanting to limit chemical intervention, I'm personally not willing to take the risk of going without Acid, and Sugar additions to insure that the wine must is acidic enough to keep and has a high enough sugar content to produce an ABV of at least 10-11%.
So yes, adding *Sugar* is necessary with most fruit to reach an adequate ABV for a good wine.
As to other additives much the same rule applies:
*Acid* to get the must into the range of a pH between 3.4 to 3.6.
*Yeast nutrient* to ensure the yeast thrives and does it thing
*Pectic Enzyme* - because without it that fruit may not fully yield its goodness and probably will not clear or clear very very slowly.

Of all the additives the *Pectic Enzyme *is about the only one that I believe I would consider skipping.

The other things commonly used like *Bentonite* (Or any clearing agents) and *Tannin* are up to user discretion. You can produce a very good wine without them as long as you accept the limitations that you might encounter. (Cloudy wine or lack of adequate astringency in the wine)

Back sugar - An example of alternatives to adding sugar to Apples is to stick with the amount of the naturally occurring sugar. The resulting fermented beverage is of course referred to as Hard Apple Cider/Apple Jack etc. with an ABV of somewhere in the 6-9 % range. But if you add sugar and aging/clearing time you can boost that ABV up to 10-14% and have an Apple wine. 

_Wine Varieties I regularly make now are: Black Currant, Wild Blackberry, Apple, Blueberry, Peach, and Tart Cherry. 
Others I have dabbled in: Plum, Wild Black Raspberry, Peach Vanilla, Pineapple/Mango, Loquat, Red Raspberry, Apricot*, and Strawberry* The last two I was not pleased with and will not attempt again._


----------



## Obbnw (May 29, 2019)

Thanks for the info.


----------



## Rice_Guy (May 30, 2019)

A food industry point of view;
* All yeast were wild at some time, currently university types are playing with GMOs but they aren’t legal, , YET!
* Wild fermentations aren’t all bad, the division that did naturally fermented dill pickles in Australia is a successful business, old style cheeses cured on wood planks have been inoculated with Marshal labs cultures, but there is a lot of natural flavors that come from the wooden shelves in the cure room, likewise for lutefisk and Japanese fermented shark. Red grape wine is kinda like falling out of bed since the “preservatives” occure naturally in the grape. (pH, phenolics) I have seen acceptable organic red wine but haven’t found organic to do a good job on non grape feedstocks. To do a good job with country wines I am adding back the factors that make grapes easy to ferment.
* The earliest wine production is estimated to be about 7000 BC, from tartrates in clay amphora. The product was recognized as desirable much much earlier, I once read an anthro article that described chimpanzees gorging on naturally fermented fruit, my guess is Neanderthal did too.
* The industry job was to figure out the rules to make something marketing dreamed up safely (per FDA) and with 100% saleable product (usually breakdown/ oxidation etc issues). Science puts unnatural constraints on foods ie we create the environment where food poisoning can be really bad. , , Only a couple of times did I work on a food with less than a two year shelf life.
* ie Natural food doesn’t last! enjoy it while hunting/ gathering in the forest.


----------



## BernardSmith (May 30, 2019)

Hi Rice_Guy, What you say is, in my opinion both interesting and important. the one thing that you did not mention (and I know zilch about marketing or business) is that if "consumers" are thought to want certain kinds of "consistency" (think Coke or Bud Lite to name two non wine examples) then the use of indigenous yeast is a near certain failure. Consistency there means every single batch no matter when or where made tastes exactly - exactly the same year in, year out and "consumers" know what to expect and they get exactly what they expect. 

Not so with natural wines. You grow what you get and not what you need for that kind of consistency. And if your market is based on folk whose view of consistency is rather more nuanced than the folk who hand out money for Coke or Bud Lite; folk who are looking for the consistency of consistently top quality wines and are happy to embrace (or at least happily try) new and unique flavors each season then "natural wines" may not be a marketing nightmare. But for home wine makers making natural wines would seem me to be a marriage made in heaven. We are not in the business of selling product. We are engaged in making wine for our own and the pleasure of others. 

But that said, you wrote: 
"I have seen acceptable organic red wine but haven’t found organic to do a good job on non grape feedstocks. To do a good job with country wines I am adding back the factors that make grapes easy to ferment." I wonder if you could elaborate on that point. What factors make grapes "easy to ferment" and what is it that you add to non grape substrates to improve the quality of country wines?


----------



## Rice_Guy (May 30, 2019)

BernardSmith said:


> Hi Rice_Guy, What you say is, in my opinion both interesting and important.
> ." I wonder if you could elaborate on that point. What factors make grapes "easy to ferment" and what is it that you add to non grape substrates to improve the quality of country wines?



I lived in the world where every crop year was different and the crop matured as it aged, ex apple baby food in September has more Malic acid so it needs more thickener in September than it will in November.
* TA this adds depth or length to flavor, less than .5 one would call it weak and balance it with no back sweetening. .8 needs backsweetening for balance and scores better for afternotes. I am wierd and use TA for flavor depth control with peach or cranberry or even grape
* antioxidant- tannins/ phenolics in reds naturally give a minimum expected shelf life. Tannins improveshelf life, soft tannin can do it without a big flavor impact
* pH is a preservative which excludes classes of microbes, pH in sulphite treated wine is part of the ionization formula for how much SO2 is free, as a standard I try to put everything (except red grape) at pH 3.2 to 3.4
* oxygen, guess this is an other, 2 ethyl alcohol oxidizes to acetaldehyde which produces a burn sensation going down. A fresh wine will not burn so what can we do to keep oxygen out? Again antioxidants as phenolics and industrial tricks as adding vitamin C. Historically red wine was preferred since it survived better, , without measured/ added SO2.
* sugar creates osmotic pressure which limits some microbes. When turned into alcohol it again is a preservative, a typical 11 or 13% abv has better shelf life than a 6 or 8% beer/ cider. Warning though more alcohol pushes the oxidation reaction to produce More acetaldehyde.
* scooter points out that some crops are nutrient deficient, DAP is always good and complex nutrients help if the juice doesn’t have a lot of dirt in it (ok call it mineral matter)
*****************************************
I didn’t go to UC Davis, I am on the research curve yet


----------



## Americanhooch (Jun 20, 2019)

Glad to see this thread revived! I recently dug up an older kit I had lying around and I'm giving it a try without adding anything other than yeast (since there's no wild yeast in concentrate!) and not doing much other than occasional racking. Since I'm still pretty new to winemaking (only one non-kit/frozen season under my belt) I want to figure out what my boundaries of intervention/nonintervention are. Doing closer to one end of the spectrum with a cheaper kit and keeping a more conservative approach with whatever I get after harvest seems like a safe path. If the no-additive kit approach doesn't fall on its face, maybe I'll take a more hands off approach with the real stuff.

I'm still a big fan of a lot of natural/low-intervention wines (but not a fan of sour wines). From what I've been able to pick up as an observer, it takes careful farming practices and good cellar discipline to be able to make good wine without the aid of chemicals or filtration. Since I'm neither a farmer and am operating out of the basement, I'm not sure I could get there myself.


----------

