# 'Natural' wines



## REDRUM (Apr 14, 2014)

Not sure if this should go here or 'general chit-chat', please move if necessary!

---
Lately there has been a lot of talk about the so-called natural wine movement, which is, basically, a philosophy that suggests that wine should be made with as little 'manipulation' as possible by the winemaker. 

This is in response to criticism of modern scientific winemaking practices as simply concocting a beverage to a recipe - trying to reverse-engineer a wine to bring it up to a certain standard rather than working in concert with what the grapes provide. 

The premise is that if you have good grapes all the ingredients to make a good wine are already there (sugars, yeasts, tannins, acid) and that by adding stuff you are actually detracting from the 'natural' expression of the fruit and the terroir.

There's a lot of criticism about the use of the term 'natural', because obviously there is still a lot of human intervention that is needed ... from grape growing to harvest to ensuring clean fermentation conditions to deciding on timing of various stages. And people that call themselves 'natural winemakers' don't always agree as to the boundaries of natural wine. Some hardliners will not add sulphur at all as a preservative, others use 'minimal sulphur', but generally nothing else is added. Often the wines ferment for a long time (sometimes using techniques like carbonic maceration), and although they are racked they might be bottled without filtering and fining. Some will mature the wine in casks, others regard oaking as another unnatural addition and prefer to do everything in completely inert vessels.

The guy that is usually regarded as the father of modern natural wines was a Beaujolais chemist and winemaker, Jules Chauvert, whose general position was that sulphur could be added but ONLY if absolutely necessary... and likewise if there was a very problematic vintage the grapes might be corrected with acid or sugar, but only as a last resort. 

I have had some absolutely incredible 'natural wines' with some very complex flavours (I have been told that by killing native yeasts with sulphur and re-inoculating with an isolated strand, you can lose a lot of the microbiotic complexity that adds interesting flavours and aromas to the wines), but I have also had some pretty ordinary ones (and oxidised ones, and ones which are just too funky for my tastes). Obviously it depends on a lot of things, first and foremost you need good quality grapes.

Generally I think that this sort of winemaking opens the door to a much broader spectrum of wine and encourages working with the wine rather than trying to make it fit a particular profile... but I also know that it requires closer attention because things can quite easily go wrong.

Interested in hearing peoples' views as to this sort of winemaking? Are there people here who strive to make wines like this? Personally I like the fact that this is the sort of winemaking that suits amateurs and small producers, because it is just not feasible to do on a large commercial scale, and you can get some really interesting and unique stuff.

EDIT: I've also read some fascinating stuff about the importance of microbial diversity in the 'ecosystems' of artisan cheeses produced using unpasteurised milk, etc .. don't know much about cheesemaking but the general ideas are the same as those applied to natural wines, it's the complexity of the microflora and fauna that lead to complexity of flavours and aromas in the wine/cheese. Same goes with those traditional Belgian wild-ferment ales.


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 14, 2014)

REDRUM said:


> but I also know that it requires closer attention because things can quite easily go wrong.



Ahh, but here's the rub: Let's say you are paying close attention, and discover you have a problem, say, Brett. What are you going to do about it without "unnatural" remedies?

I am in the camp of using all means available to make a better food/wine product. If that means leaving it alone, I'll leave it alone. If it means hosing it with a chemical or a culture, I'll do that.



> The guy that is usually regarded as the father of modern natural wines was a Beaujolais chemist and winemaker, Jules Chauvert, whose general position was that sulphur could be added but ONLY if absolutely necessary... and likewise if there was a very problematic vintage the grapes might be corrected with acid or sugar, but only as a last resort.



So his principles are malleable?


----------



## seth8530 (Apr 14, 2014)

You bring up some interesting points, but I am still in the camp of using all available tools to ensure that the grapes that I use will make a great wine. That being said, when you get some good grapes a lot can be said about not messing with them until you ruin them.


----------



## REDRUM (Apr 15, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> Ahh, but here's the rub: Let's say you are paying close attention, and discover you have a problem, say, Brett. What are you going to do about it without "unnatural" remedies?


Guess that depends on how big the apparent problem is ... there is a line of argument that says that brett (for example) is not necessarily a fault at all and is noticeably present in some wines that are considered to be very good! This is an interesting article about it: http://www.wineanorak.com/brettanomyces.htm 



> I am in the camp of using all means available to make a better food/wine product. If that means leaving it alone, I'll leave it alone. If it means hosing it with a chemical or a culture, I'll do that.


Yep, to me (as a beginner) it seems like that is the real skill in winemaking: to know where that line is, when to intervene and when to leave it the hell alone. In principle, I would like to be brave enough to really experiment with letting the wine run wild and see where it takes me, but in practice I tend towards the risk-averse. This vintage I am making a batch of wine with the same grapes as my father-in-law, however I sulfured and inoculated with packet yeast, while he added nothing and let the native yeasts run the ferment. It will be interesting to see how each of them compare at the end...



> So his principles are malleable?


 Yes, to an extent, but it sounds as though he got gradually more hardline throughout his life.


----------



## REDRUM (Apr 15, 2014)

seth8530 said:


> You bring up some interesting points, but I am still in the camp of using all available tools to ensure that the grapes that I use will make a great wine. That being said, when you get some good grapes a lot can be said about not messing with them until you ruin them.



I think that's the key to it all: with greater input you get better consistency and much more control over the quality of the outcome. With less input you might get some happy surprises and possibly some very interesting wine, but there's also much more chance of ending up with a bottle of vinegar or something that smells like a rat drowned in it...


----------



## JohnT (Apr 15, 2014)

*Natural NEVER means better!*

This topic come up from time to time. 

This "Natural" approach is nothing more than taking a reactive approach to winemaking. There are many issues that can arise that are rather hard to deal with when detected (like oxidation). A proactive approach (like the use of k-meta, yeast nutrient, and adjusting acid) reduces the risk of having a bad year. 

Too many times have I observed winemakers dealing with batches of wine that have gone south only because they had this same "do as little as possible" mentality. It is at times almost heart wrenching knowing that these cases could have been prevented!

At no time have I ever come across a true test that shows a "natural" approach is better. To my knowledge, no one has ever done a comparison of "natural" and "unnatural" techniques within the exact same vintage where the "Natural" approach was clearly better. 


Folks ultimately make their own call on this. To me, putting your wine at risk to reap unsubstantiated reward is clearly NOT the way to go. I always attempt to do my best in talking beginner winemakers out of this line of thinking.


----------



## GreginND (Apr 15, 2014)

There is nothing unnatural about SO2.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 15, 2014)

Just to add another point, 

Most of this "natural" mentality stems from the idea that we should make wine like they did in the "good old days". We should consider this.. A much larger portion of wine made in the good old days sucked! When wine issues popped up, the only thing that could be done was to lower the price of wine, sacrifice a goat, and pray to the gods for help. 

I am sure that the ancient winemakers would give his/her left arm for our amount of experience and knowledge.


----------



## nayrea143 (Apr 15, 2014)

I tried the wild yeast method and no additives or anything. Wellllllll it's terrible. Un drinkable!!! I have friends that do it this way for generations and some of their wines are good and some are hard to swallow. Needless to say I ordered the ph tester, chromo kit and all necessary chemicals. I wanted to keep it natural but it's truly heartbreaking when it ends up ruined. I was given a lot of great advice on this site about the wild yeast method. Very insightful and ultimately changed my mind. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## REDRUM (Apr 15, 2014)

JohnT said:


> This topic come up from time to time.
> 
> This "Natural" approach is nothing more than taking a reactive approach to winemaking. There are many issues that can arise that are rather hard to deal with when detected (like oxidation). A proactive approach (like the use of k-meta, yeast nutrient, and adjusting acid) reduces the risk of having a bad year.
> 
> ...



And I appreciate it! The reason I'm on this forum is to learn more about the technical aspects of the craft...!

I'm not trying to suggest that all wine should be made without additives (some styles that I love would be impossible, and I think it would be very hard to make a fine wine with really long ageing potential). HOWEVER I have tasted some fantastic 'natural' wines which are very different from their 'conventional' counterparts. Of course quality is subjective but I don't agree that a natural approach is always going to be worse. Much more risky, of course, especially for home winemakers... but surely sometimes an approach which is too prescriptive can have its own drawbacks.

For me, I want to hedge my bets (I said I was risk-averse!) and experiment with both... Definitely don't want to go down the zero-sulphur route though, that seems like asking for trouble.


----------



## REDRUM (Apr 16, 2014)

nayrea143 said:


> I tried the wild yeast method and no additives or anything. Wellllllll it's terrible. Un drinkable!!! I have friends that do it this way for generations and some of their wines are good and some are hard to swallow. Needless to say I ordered the ph tester, chromo kit and all necessary chemicals. I wanted to keep it natural but it's truly heartbreaking when it ends up ruined. I was given a lot of great advice on this site about the wild yeast method. Very insightful and ultimately changed my mind.



Hey Nayrea - I have been following your thread about wild yeast fermentation because the way you got into wine making is kind of the same experience that I'm going through now ... and a lot of what you're saying rings true for me. My father-in-law's homemade wine is sometimes very good and sometimes f'ing awful... however the last bad vintage we were able to locate the problem in a bacterial infection from the old wooden fermentation vat he was using. 

This season he has some new equipment (crusher/destemmer, new basket press, high-density plastic tubs, big glass demijohns rather than old barrels for maturation). Always scrupulous with cleaning and the wine smells/tastes vibrant and healthy thus far. HOWEVER he is on a weird health kick at the moment and decides he doesn't want to add SO2 to his wine this year, so I sort of fear for its future. But we'll see how it goes. I'm doing my own batch with cultured yeast and adding SO2 (but nothing else) so this will be an interesting comparison.


----------



## nayrea143 (Apr 16, 2014)

REDRUM said:


> Hey Nayrea - I have been following your thread about wild yeast fermentation because the way you got into wine making is kind of the same experience that I'm going through now ... and a lot of what you're saying rings true for me. My father-in-law's homemade wine is sometimes very good and sometimes f'ing awful... however the last bad vintage we were able to locate the problem in a bacterial infection from the old wooden fermentation vat he was using.
> 
> 
> 
> This season he has some new equipment (crusher/destemmer, new basket press, high-density plastic tubs, big glass demijohns rather than old barrels for maturation). Always scrupulous with cleaning and the wine smells/tastes vibrant and healthy thus far. HOWEVER he is on a weird health kick at the moment and decides he doesn't want to add SO2 to his wine this year, so I sort of fear for its future. But we'll see how it goes. I'm doing my own batch with cultured yeast and adding SO2 (but nothing else) so this will be an interesting comparison.




Well keep me updated on how it goes. After sooooooo much research and advice I have kinda gone the opposite way. I am actually going to use the cultured yeast, meta and I am also going to do a mlf fermentation on my grapes in a few weeks. A big undertaking for a newbie but I am reading and preparing. And after doing some reading a lot of these things we add and promote to the wine can happen naturally as well but just not a guarantee. Which answers my question of why some wine is better then others they make. I would guess the better ones most likely went through some degree of mlf on their own...!?? But most of their wine is like rocket fuel. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## Turock (Apr 16, 2014)

You state that you have to have good quality grapes as one of the means for success. Well, WHO has perfect grapes? Most years, the weather creates challenges for producing the perfect grape. No one is in control of that so it's up to the winemaker to make up for what nature could not provide. The last perfect year that we had here was in 1999.

I think people get too obsessed with this "natural" movement. It's also very natural to poop in one's pants--but who wants THAT??


----------



## nayrea143 (Apr 16, 2014)

Turock said:


> You state that you have to have good quality grapes as one of the means for success. Well, WHO has perfect grapes? Most years, the weather creates challenges for producing the perfect grape. No one is in control of that so it's up to the winemaker to make up for what nature could not provide. The last perfect year that we had here was in 1999.
> 
> I think people get too obsessed with this "natural" movement. It's also very natural to poop in one's pants--but who wants THAT??




Bahahahahhaha
I like when someone told me u can catch a fast ball with your bare hands but why would u?!? Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## sour_grapes (Apr 16, 2014)

nayrea143 said:


> Bahahahahhaha
> I like when someone told me u can catch a fast ball with your bare hands but why would u?!? Lol



I believe that was I. Turock's image is a bit more, uhhh, colorful, no?


----------



## Turock (Apr 16, 2014)

LOL---no wonder all my friends, who know me well, tell me that I'm VERY organic!!! I just couldn't think of a more natural thing to do that most of us take unnatural control over.


----------



## nayrea143 (Apr 16, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> I believe that was I. Turock's image is a bit more, uhhh, colorful, no?




Yes more colorful for sure!!!! But still great advice!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## JohnT (Apr 16, 2014)

nayrea143 said:


> I tried the wild yeast method and no additives or anything. Wellllllll it's terrible. Un drinkable!!! I have friends that do it this way for generations and some of their wines are good and some are hard to swallow. Needless to say I ordered the ph tester, chromo kit and all necessary chemicals. I wanted to keep it natural but it's truly heartbreaking when it ends up ruined. I was given a lot of great advice on this site about the wild yeast method. Very insightful and ultimately changed my mind. .


 
Naerea, sounds like you learned the hard way. Natural fermentation takes the choice of yeast out of your hands. Winemaking this way is nothing more than a crap-shoot. Why go with wild, unpredictable yeast when there are yeasts that have been bred for centuries to produce good wine! 



REDRUM said:


> And I appreciate it! The reason I'm on this forum is to learn more about the technical aspects of the craft...!
> 
> I'm not trying to suggest that all wine should be made without additives (some styles that I love would be impossible, and I think it would be very hard to make a fine wine with really long ageing potential). HOWEVER I have tasted some fantastic 'natural' wines which are very different from their 'conventional' counterparts. Of course quality is subjective but I don't agree that a natural approach is always going to be worse. Much more risky, of course, especially for home winemakers... but surely sometimes an approach which is too prescriptive can have its own drawbacks.
> 
> For me, I want to hedge my bets (I said I was risk-averse!) and experiment with both... Definitely don't want to go down the zero-sulphur route though, that seems like asking for trouble.


 

REDRUM, 

Please do not mistake my criticism of the Natural approach as a slant against you. I am glad you brought up this subject. 





nayrea143 said:


> Well keep me updated on how it goes. After sooooooo much research and advice I have kinda gone the opposite way. I am actually going to use the cultured yeast, meta and I am also going to do a mlf fermentation on my grapes in a few weeks. A big undertaking for a newbie but I am reading and preparing. And after doing some reading a lot of these things we add and promote to the wine can happen naturally as well but just not a guarantee. Which answers my question of why some wine is better then others they make. I would guess the better ones most likely went through some degree of mlf on their own...!?? But most of their wine is like rocket fuel.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


 
Again, Good for you Nayrea! You will be glad you did it this way!


----------



## Turock (Apr 17, 2014)

Another thing that comes to mind is that you can spend alot of money on grapes. So you want to be sure you get a good result from them. I'll bet we drink much better wines today than what was ever made in ancient times. And it's only because we use more scientific means in order to get it there. This is why it's called wine"making"----other wise it'd be called wine"happenstance." What you do at the primary is the designing of the wine. To just let anything happen-- with what happens to be there-- is like raising a child without discipline and the teaching of boundaries of behavior. We're creating boundaries for the wine's behavior by working with it in the primary--what you do there is basically what you're going to get.


----------



## JohnT (Apr 17, 2014)

Turock said:


> Another thing that comes to mind is that you can spend alot of money on grapes. So you want to be sure you get a good result from them. I'll bet we drink much better wines today than what was ever made in ancient times. And it's only because we use more scientific means in order to get it there. This is why it's called wine"making"----other wise it'd be called wine"happenstance." What you do at the primary is the designing of the wine. To just let anything happen-- with what happens to be there-- is like raising a child without discipline and the teaching of boundaries of behavior. We're creating boundaries for the wine's behavior by working with it in the primary--what you do there is basically what you're going to get.



Turock, I could not more strongly agree on all of your above points. Take all of that into account! Too many times have beginners been lured into "natural" winemaking only to experience heartache in the end.


----------



## Turock (Apr 18, 2014)

Boy, ain't that the truth John. We make alot of different wines---about 16-20 different ones. And all of them are so flavorful, smooth, and balanced. I want everyone to get to that point in their winemaking and the first step is good practices.


----------



## nayrea143 (Apr 18, 2014)

JohnT said:


> Turock, I could not more strongly agree on all of your above points. Take all of that into account! Too many times have beginners been lured into "natural" winemaking only to experience heartache in the end.




Amen to that!!!! Empty wine cellar here 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## PinoZ (May 1, 2014)

I've combined both methods and have good results. I innoculate with yeast packets and then let it run its couse naturally without adding sulphites. I rack 2-3 times, top off & filtwr with mini jet. Also the addition of oak spirals can add a bit of complexity. Bottle after 6 months and enjoy. Anyone else ever try this way?


----------



## ed71 (May 1, 2014)

Even though Im somewhat of a newbie to this group and winemaking this article sounds like something an organic vegetarian would come up with.

Sure organic grown veggies and fruit (along with organic fed animals) taste better. It doesn't mean you'll get high class quality silky fine tasting wine.

If one is meaning of "natural wines" as in the way the ancients made it, then most likely you'll end up with something similar to "inmate wine" or "prison wine" whereas scientific equipment are none at all and cultured wine yeasts dont exist. They simply rely on trial and error and with what they have.

And even then, the ancients had years and years of craft skills passed down unto them (very much like Master to apprentice type learning) in which to this day much of those same skills have been lost to our generations. I'm quite sure they could detect when fermentation was done and when a batch was to become spoiled or when it needed aging or when it was to be sold as vinegar or even when it was to be watered down to be sold to the lower ranks.

Its only been bout 3 centuries of the scientific method and the rest of 30k of the human race did they make mead, wine and beers naturally. Its actually nothing new....in fact the new one is the "scientific method". If they can build the pyramids without fossil fuels scientific discovered machines, then they can make wine naturally! (which they have been doing for several millenniums.....eh hemmm...of course, it never was perfect)

So one can say its not impossible. But why go that way when there is an easier way? A way without losing batches and making batches of vinegars?


----------



## TinyPirate (May 1, 2014)

I say try it, like I did: after reading Katz's "the art of fermentation" (great fun) I made a wild ginger beer, and I also made a strawberry and a plum soda. The later two were lovely, the ginger beer? Well, let's just say that the wild yeast around here must have a thing for feet as ginger-soaked-socks is kinda what my ginger beer tasted and smelled like. 

I used bought yeast for the other two sodas and they were much nicer. 

Wild yeast can be amazing. I am thinking here of Belgian beer, in particular the "sour reds" which are open fermented and rely on local yeasts, I believe. Even so, those brews are fragile as changing local conditions changes the dominant yeast. I read one brewery was surrounded by orchards - these are dwindling and they fear for the quality of their beer. 

So, try it yourself with a wild ginger beer and see what the local yeasts in your neck of the woods are like! It is interesting, cheap and easy to do. You might find that the local yeasts would really suit a type of wine you want to make, or you might not...

We also should remember that the ancients drank wine that bears little resemblance to what we drink today. As I understand it much wine was drunk young and low in alcohol. Fermentation was a way of storing water cleanly (very important) and preserving seasonal flavors and nutrition. Alcohol content and all the things we like about modern wine weren't so important, I believe, as having a liquid that didn't make you sick and tasted ok. 

So if 4% fizzy fruit juice with a hint of socks is your thing, go 100% natural, you can absolutely achieve that. But if you are aiming to match what gets bottled and sold you better hope to be lucky enough to have a great local yeast and perfect fruit and conditions


----------



## fizzerzz (May 1, 2014)

Well I have been making wine since I was 12 and I am also a Senior Scientist and I never add SO2 at the end of fermentation. OK, I have the occasional blown cork but rather that than feel the arrhythmia of my heart beat after a few glasses of SO2 treated wine. SO2 causes changes in lung and heart function- not good if you have existing heart problems or are an asthmatic. You don't need it.


----------



## JohnT (May 1, 2014)

fizzerzz said:


> Well I have been making wine since I was 12 and I am also a Senior Scientist and I never add SO2 at the end of fermentation. OK, I have the occasional blown cork but rather that than feel the arrhythmia of my heart beat after a few glasses of SO2 treated wine. SO2 causes changes in lung and heart function- not good if you have existing heart problems or are an asthmatic. You don't need it.


 
What about simply reducing the amount you use? The legal max level in the USA is usually 350ppm. Why not simply bring the level down to, say, 30ppm? This way you wine can stay clear and not any blown corks.


----------



## Turock (May 1, 2014)

Blown corks are due to too much CO2 in the wine or a refermentation. SO2 has nothing to do with it. It's always a mistake to suggest that SO2 is not needed. I mean, sure you can eliminate it, but I would drink those wines early because I guarantee that they will become oxidized, taking on the flavor of nuts at first, then moving to tasting like liquid metal. Back in our newbie days, we tried keeping the SO2 very low--we dumped more wine than you want to hear about.

It has been said that you can't start to taste SO2 until it reaches about 150PPM. The highest PPM any wine with the highest PH would need is approaching 100PPM. Wines with a PH of 3.4 only need about 32 PPM. So to suggest to people in an open forum with many new winemakers that they don't need to SO2 their wines is very misleading and will do nothing but give them more problems they don't need. Believe me---SO2 your wines to about 50PPM if you can't test and you'll be fine. All winemakers who can afford to do so should be SO2 testing.


----------



## JohnT (May 1, 2014)

Turock said:


> Blown corks are due to too much CO2 in the wine or a refermentation. SO2 has nothing to do with it. It's always a mistake to suggest that SO2 is not needed. I mean, sure you can eliminate it, but I would drink those wines early because I guarantee that they will become oxidized, taking on the flavor of nuts at first, then moving to tasting like liquid metal. Back in our newbie days, we tried keeping the SO2 very low--we dumped more wine than you want to hear about.
> 
> It has been said that you can't start to taste SO2 until it reaches about 150PPM. The highest PPM any wine with the highest PH would need is approaching 100PPM. Wines with a PH of 3.4 only need about 32 PPM. So to suggest to people in an open forum with many new winemakers that they don't need to SO2 their wines is very misleading and will do nothing but give them more problems they don't need. Believe me---SO2 your wines to about 50PPM if you can't test and you'll be fine. All winemakers who can afford to do so should be SO2 testing.


 
Turock, 

I could not agree more, but wouldn't maintaining a decent level of SO2 make refermentation more difficult?


----------



## Calamity Cellars (May 1, 2014)

JohnT said:


> Turock,
> 
> I could not agree more, but wouldn't maintaining a decent level of SO2 make refermentation more difficult?




No. So2 does not prevent or slow down fermentation. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## Calamity Cellars (May 1, 2014)

The sensory threshold for so2 is ~2mg/l molecular. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## JohnT (May 1, 2014)

I found this blurb ... 

Sulfur dioxide plays two important roles. Firstly, it is an anti-microbial agent, and as such is used to *help curtail the growth of undesirable fault producing yeasts* and bacteria. Secondly, it acts as an antioxidant, safeguarding the wine's fruit integrity and protecting it against browning. Despite its chemical simplicity, SO2 can take on a few different forms in a wine. One form is called 'molecular SO2'. When in this form, it is around 500 times more effective in killing wine microbes than when in any of the other forms that it can take (Sneyd et al. 1992). Luckily for us, the desirable yeasts that undertake wine fermentation are more resistant to SO2 than most of the spoilage yeasts. So having some SO2 around helps give the desirable bugs a leg-up in their competitive dog eat dog world in which they co-exist.

As an anti-microbial, it is my understanding that it makes it more difficult for a refermentation to kick off.


----------



## sour_grapes (May 1, 2014)

I think Calamity's point is that wine yeast have been bred to be tolerant in the presence of fair amounts of SO2, and therefore wine yeast can cause further fermentation. (Wild yeast, as you point out, will be toasted by the SO2.)


----------



## Calamity Cellars (May 1, 2014)

sour_grapes said:


> I think Calamity's point is that wine yeast have been bred to be tolerant in the presence of fair amounts of SO2, and therefore wine yeast can cause further fermentation. (Wild yeast, as you point out, will be toasted by the SO2.)




Exactly. The only two ways I know to prevent it is true absolute sterile filtration or raising etoh levels above the toxicity point ie in a port. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## REDRUM (May 1, 2014)

ed71 said:


> Even though Im somewhat of a newbie to this group and winemaking this article sounds like something an organic vegetarian would come up with.


Lol, far from it. 


> Sure organic grown veggies and fruit (along with organic fed animals) taste better. It doesn't mean you'll get high class quality silky fine tasting wine.


I agree. However I have drunk enough very good wine made without additives, or with minimal sulphur, to know that it CAN be done, and the results may be better. It is a bit of a fad at the moment though, and I'm wary about people rushing to jump on the 'natural wines' bandwagon just because there is a market for it. As far as I'm concerned this sort of wine is a complement to wines made using mainstream techniques, not a 'better' way of doing things. It's not something that would be easy to do when you're talking about large production volumes - but in my research a lot of professional winemakers (whose education often involves chemistry, microbiology and so on) are excited by experimenting with these sorts of wines in small batches and getting good results. People take different approaches, but in my experience 'natural' winemakers are not necessarily 'unscientific' winemakers.

The way the professionals tell it, to succeed going down this avenue you need to understand exactly what conditions your grapes are in - they need to be balanced in terms of acid and sugars (bearing in mind that acid, tannins and alcohol are preservatives in their own right, and grapes also have their own supply of sulphites), be free of disease, and fermentation needs to take place with as much care as possible to avoid unwanted bacterial infections.

Now, the risk might be too great for most home winemakers to avoid using cultured yeast strains, tweaking their wines with acid, etc. I used packet yeast and K-meta because I'm only doing one batch and don't want anything to go wrong....! But in future I want to experiment on a couple of buckets here and there... and if they go wrong, so be it!


----------



## REDRUM (May 2, 2014)

And here's another article from the Wine Anorak website, with a bit of interesting debate in the commets section:
http://www.wineanorak.com/wineblog/natural-wine/natural-wine-a-primer


----------



## pjmartin (May 2, 2014)

I did the same procedure last fall. I added yeast to a bucket of burgundy and no sulfites (wife is allergic to sulfites). Added nothing else, rack every 30/45 days, filtered and bottled around six months. Wife and other family members are happy with the wine!!!


----------



## pjmartin (May 2, 2014)

PinoZ said:


> I've combined both methods and have good results. I innoculate with yeast packets and then let it run its couse naturally without adding sulphites. I rack 2-3 times, top off & filtwr with mini jet. Also the addition of oak spirals can add a bit of complexity. Bottle after 6 months and enjoy. Anyone else ever try this way?




I did the same procedure last fall. I added yeast to a bucket of burgundy and no sulfites (wife is allergic to sulfites). Added nothing else, rack every 30/45 days, filtered and bottled around six months. Wife and other family members are happy with the wine!!!


Sent from my iPad using Wine Making


----------



## nayrea143 (May 22, 2014)

So I tried some of my natural wine yesterday and it tastes sooooooo much better then it did. It's improving. Not great but def better!!! I am planning on racking and doing a chromo test and ph test and getting a hydrometer reading on it when we press my Chilean grapes. Then I will prob add meta then and bulk age some more!!! 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## nayrea143 (May 22, 2014)

I should prob add it is Italian merlot 6 gallon. Started the end of oct. And it has not been touched. No racking and no meta and no yeast. Eek


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## sdelli (May 22, 2014)

I tried natural fermentation last January... A year and almost 5 months later I just took all my Syrah and emptied the bottles back into a carboy! The fricken bottles will not stop fizzing! Ya... Ran it thru the all-in -one long ago.... I now took a chance and added some Pottasium Sorbate to see if I can calm it down.... Never done it since..... Never do it again.


Sam


----------



## seth8530 (May 22, 2014)

sdelli said:


> I tried natural fermentation last January... A year and almost 5 months later I just took all my Syrah and emptied the bottles back into a carboy! The fricken bottles will not stop fizzing! Ya... Ran it thru the all-in -one long ago.... I now took a chance and added some Pottasium Sorbate to see if I can calm it down.... Never done it since..... Never do it again.
> 
> 
> Sam



You might have to try sterile filtering if you have the ability. I would be tempted to put it into a carboy, put it in the freezer at say 28 degrees for a few weeks. Then sterile filter and then apply sulfites and sorbate. It might not be a sure shot, but with something that old it is definitely not something you want to pitch.


----------



## nayrea143 (May 22, 2014)

sdelli said:


> I tried natural fermentation last January... A year and almost 5 months later I just took all my Syrah and emptied the bottles back into a carboy! The fricken bottles will not stop fizzing! Ya... Ran it thru the all-in -one long ago.... I now took a chance and added some Pottasium Sorbate to see if I can calm it down.... Never done it since..... Never do it again.
> 
> 
> Sam




Oh man!!!!! 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## nayrea143 (May 22, 2014)

sdelli said:


> I tried natural fermentation last January... A year and almost 5 months later I just took all my Syrah and emptied the bottles back into a carboy! The fricken bottles will not stop fizzing! Ya... Ran it thru the all-in -one long ago.... I now took a chance and added some Pottasium Sorbate to see if I can calm it down.... Never done it since..... Never do it again.
> 
> 
> Sam




I won't do it again either but I am glad I don't think I have to throw it out!!!! I am much happier and comfortable with the way I am doing it now. 


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## JohnT (May 23, 2014)

A wise man once said to me... 

"Natural wines turn out good in spite of being 'natural' and not because of it"..


----------



## tizok_123 (May 23, 2014)

There is nothing better than enjoying the delicious taste of a natural wine harvested from the best vineyards and wineries in processing quality.

Spanish Experience


----------



## Calamity Cellars (May 23, 2014)

We used to ride horses but now we have cars and jets. Does that make horses wrong or just a less effective mode of transportation? We used to drive cars without seat belts and most of us made most of our trips safely. So does that mean we should drive without seat belts?

Silly questions and answers to illustrate a point. Wine was made for thousands of years without any enological intervention. The Romans discovered sulfur as a preservative. The French discovered barrels as a storage vessel......and on and on to modern winemaking with all the science and techniques we have at our disposal.

I get the appeal some have with "natural" wines. They think it is somehow better or more pure. But, in my opinion, that is junk logic. Yeast produces SO2 naturally during fermentation. adding a bit more just preserves the intended wine. If they want to make true natural wines then there should be no stainless tanks, glass bottles or modern closures. I want to see wines stored in lambskin at the Fred Meyer. Using isolated yeasts is not using "unnatural" yeasts as using the term "natural yeast" for unknown wild yeast implies. The commercially available isolated yeasts are naturally occurring wild yeast that have been separated from other strains and give the winemaker choices in style and purity to help control the final artistic product he/she is trying to create. 

I could care less if someone wants to make lottery wine. Best of luck to you. I want to use all of the modern tools available to me to consistently ensure that my investment in grapes, equipment and time yields a wine I am proud to share with my friends and customers. I will wear my seat belt.

I am now stepping down from my soapbox and going to add so2 to some barrels.


----------



## nayrea143 (May 23, 2014)

JohnT said:


> A wise man once said to me...
> 
> "Natural wines turn out good in spite of being 'natural' and not because of it"..




Hahahahahah I like that!!! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Wine Making


----------



## REDRUM (May 29, 2014)

Calamity Cellars - I agree with you that labelling some winemaking techniques/practices as 'unnatural' is a problem.. in reality I don't think you can draw a clear division between natural and man-made, because all wine is the product of the interrelation of natural & cultural processes.

For what it's worth, I think the issue a lot of people have with the idea of so-called 'natural' wines is that they see it as unscientific or irrational. Again, all I can do is refer to my own experience which is that I have met and interviewed a number of professional winemakers who hold high-level scientific qualifications (in oenology, chemistry, molecular biology etc), who make excellent wines that are highly regarded critically, and who consciously strive to reduce their inputs into the wine because they feel that the wine is better and more interesting as a result.

There may be a little bit more risk involved but I wouldn't say that their approach is reckless or a crap-shoot, and it is definitely not unscientific, because it requires sterling standards of hygiene and a thorough understanding of what is going on at a chemical level at every stage of the process.

It's just a different orientation to the same problem, which is that of how to make good wine. If you see the manipulation of wine by the addition of acid, tannins, or whatever as something to be avoided where possible (rather than an integral, standard part of the winemaking processes) then you're more likely to focus on getting the grapes as good as possible to begin with.


----------



## TinyPirate (May 29, 2014)

It sounds like a great and interesting approach if you can control as much of the process as possible. For the home wine maker a more pragmatic process is probably best!


----------



## REDRUM (May 29, 2014)

Yep, fully agree.


----------

