[1]

I feel myself to be firmly in Darrell Corti's corner. While I agree that the Australian's have made great strides in wine production research, I feel that research has been mainly focused on making forward, more easily approachable wines. I am not sure that makes those wines as well structured, food friendly, or, more importantly, as age worthy as we would like.

[2]

It's funny when dinosaurs talk.

[3]

Corti may have some valid points on a couple of topics but overall he’s arrogant and thinks his way IS the way. Some things come and go with time, Darrell NEEDS to be one of them. Your time has passed Mr. Corti, now please step aside.

[4]

For as long as I have known Darrell -- some 30 plus years -- he has always spoken with a voice of authority on the wines of the world, and with a rare brilliance and inexplicable passion for getting the facts of any wine story right! I encourage Darrell to keep on speaking out and challenging the California wine industry to rise up with a bolder vision, sharper ideas, and better wines for the next generation to appreciate. Thank you Darrell Corti!

[5]

Keep it up Darrell! It's simply amazing how many California-produced wines spoil a fine meal because of their high alcohol content and verbosity. It's too bad we have to go to other states or continents, night after night, to find a quaffable red wine to go with our meal!

[6]

Spot on Darrell - and congratulations on your recent award!

[7]

Thank goodness someone reported on Darrell's talk. I personally spoke to him after his talk. Specifically I addressed him about his comments on FPS. I am taking your article to UCD tomorrow.

[8]

Why stop with wine? Why not tell me how to comb my hair... what music to listen to... what food to eat. Personally, I'm tired of anyone telling someone else that what they like is "wrong". What Darrell chooses to drink is his own business. What he chooses to sell is his own business. But telling wineries to change what they do to fit his taste is taking it too far. There are TONS of wine made in the style Darrell advocates. Why is he threatened that another style exists as well? Isn't there room for more than just his vision of what wine should be? As far as I'm concerned, choice is a good thing.

[9]

As to Mr. Corti's use of his bully pulpit to create a negative where none exists I say, "Baloney." To talk about brix and alcohol and to draw a line and say "no beyond this number" is to place limits which neither the consumer, the winemaker nor the terroir of certain regions of the Golden State recognize as proper or beneficial. Here in Paso we make great wine all day long with fruit which tastes better at 27 brix. There is no heat on the pallet or nose, just natural ripeness. Maybe 27 brix is unnatural in Carneros or Anderson Valley but here in Paso you would be a fool to pick Cabernet or Syrah at 23.5 to 24 with green seeds and a bell pepper bouquet. Mr. Corti has the right to sell any wine he chooses and if he wishes to limit his selection that is his business. When Mr. Corti tries to say, "I know what is best for California wine," his ego exceeds his expertise. Perhaps he was on the panel that fell for 2 Buck Chuck at the State Fair. The market, the winemaker and the region in question best determine how a wine should be made and when grapes should be picked. Stay away from Paso Mr. Corti, you just don't have the chops to enjoy big bold reds, exhibiting ripe fruit but remaining smooth and soft as a baby's bum. Besides, your absence just leaves more room for all the Californians who love Paso reds.

[10]

A great man with a true grasp of the loss to California created by the corporatization of the wine industry. While the giants continue to buy and create new labels to market the same old wines, small estate wineries are denied access to the distribution system by the entrenched power elite. We need a lot more Darrell Corti's to turn around the homogenization of the wine industry.

[11]

Bravo, Darrell,

I don’t always agree with you but you always leave us thinking! One only has to try to sell to Darrell to know that you need to leave your ego and pretense at the door. To be clear of your passion and honest in your attempt trumps the stats, points and glossy bits once you pull the cork for him. Detractors should come to the plate to engage and continue the discourse that Darrell has brought us, in the end it might be fruitful for us all.

[12]

Darrell has a very valid point that the industry has not spent enough on research and this will put us at a disadvantage in the future.

[13]

[re: comment #2]

Dinosaur? I think not. The insanity with the high alc % does nothing but serve the interests of certain media types within the wine industry who choose to ignore, for whatever reasons, that wine is about balance and proportion and TRUE varietal character. If someone enjoys the high alc wines, it is certainly their right to drink all they want. Not for any of us to say differently if they so choose. What is wrong, very wrong, is for the media to hold these wines out there as being the "holy grail" of winemaking to people who don't know any better and then are disappointed not in that particular wine, but wine in general.

Thank you Darrell!

[14]

When I read comments like: "...he (Darrell Corti) took a jab at California winemaking in general." I see red, and, no, we're not talking about wine. True, there are certain parties within the industry who choose a certain style which MAY include higher alcohol levels, but to tar everyone else with the same broad brush is just plain wrong, irresponsible and lazy, IMO. This sort of nonsense is a constant refrain on the internet, as if California is one homogenous entity, style-wise. When one considers the diversity of AVAs within the State and then factors in the multitude of different winemaking philosophies the argument simply does not fly. Arrgh!! Mr. Corti does get one thing absolutely right and that concerns the shameful lack of financial support for UCD.

[15]

When the Wine Spectator named a 16% alcohol Merlot with residual sugar and near illegal V.A. the Wine of the Year, the "fruit forward" insanity reached its apex. Around that time, I heard a young winemaker, speaking during the harvest, justifying his 16% alcohol "BlockBuster" Cabs. "I'm looking for physiological ripeness. Why my grapes today are 27 Brix and the acids still haven't dropped." I thought for a moment of explaining what happens during dehydration to grape composition, but then I passed. He obviously wasn't listening in class at Davis a few years earlier, so why would he listen to me now. His world is all about being the biggest, the boldest, the darkest, the heaviest, the fruitiest and the most intense. Oh, and of course, swallowable at two years of age. Size is the only thing that the chronically sensory-fatigued Advocate or Wine Spectator can detect and they are this winemaker's customer. Unlike Corti, this winemaker had never tasted decades of claret or classic California Cabernet and couldn't see how greatness can begin and develop in wines of [lower] alcohol. I once saw Corti taste six new wines from single growths out of brown bags in a Bordeaux shipper's laboratory. They were not yet in the bottle, he had never tasted that vintage, yet he nailed all six wines to the amazement of the shipper and us all. I think Darrell would just like to have us make wines that we (and he) can quaff and enjoy with that same degree of individuality.

[16]

As a former employee and student of Darrell's (we are all his student) I think I can shed some light on this argument. Every week, Darrell and his staff taste nearly 100 wines. These wines are tasted in a rapid format, and evaluated, initially, for balance. After the tasting, the wines are taken to a local restaurant of esteem, and tasted against food, where final buying decisions are made. Often during the preliminary tasting, I would find a wine that I liked (usually higher in alcohol), and I would motion to Darrell that I liked it, and henceforth, believed I could sell it. He would nod his head, listen with more respect than I deserved, and he would usually reply, "Gretchen, yes, I agree with you, the wine tastes good. But is it *interesting*?"


This is what excess alcohol, in my opinion, does to a wine. It makes a wine less interesting. It is like too much makeup on a gorgeous woman. She is so much more beautiful without it.



As for him taking California winemakers to task, I would expect nothing less from Darrell; as the 'father' to many of them, he is entitled. To those who have the audacity to name call and begrudge him, I encourage you to explore his message further, and to remove your own ego in the process. The future of drinkable cellared wines is dependent upon it!

[17]

Corti said, “ ‘Certainly the wine has high alcohol, but the wine is in balance’ is now the winespeak. Humbug I say. I would like to see someone quaff a 15.5 percent or 16.2 percent Zinfandel. Yet these are persistently produced.”


Quaffability = balance. Yep, there is no doubt about it. Mr Corti certainly knows his wine lore.

~ Mike

[18]

There is one way to help clear a lot of the confusion here: All those in favor of lower alcohol wines and all those in favor of unrestrained alcohol can come together in a blind tasting of high and low alc wines -- first without food and then with food. We'll learn a lot and maybe give the wine landscape more definition. I find it interesting, though, that those who have a track record of coming out of the shadows whenever this subject arises, only to make sniping and insulting comments, are most likely NOT to man up and come to the table. What gives?

[19]

Retailers are certainly free to choose what to carry in order to better serve their customers. There is room for all styles. Corti Bros. has merely identified itself as a lower-octane outlet. Ties and skirts change over the years, anyway.

[20]

Arthur,


I'm sure your post does not refer to me, but just in case it does let me set the record straight. My opinions on this topic are publicly available on my blog by searching under “alcohol”, but let’s just cover a few points for clarity.


1) I am not exclusively in favor of high alcohol wines, but I am in favor of letting the consumer have a choice. That is clearly not the road that the anti-high alcohol league (Corti, Dunn, Asimov, McCoy, Berger and others) travel. Statements like “The current fad of higher and higher alcohol wines should stop” (Randy Dunn), or refusing your customers wines with alcohol above 14.5% (Darrell Corti) do not add to the discussion, they stifle it.


2) In terms of whether high or low alcohol wines are suitable with food, I’ve already challenged the anti-high alcohol league to look at this in a number of ways. The most obvious is the adoption of a tasting competition similar to that run by The Sydney International Wine Competition where wines are judged beside appropriate foods by an international panel; SIWC was founded in 1982. With all the hoopla about high alcohol wines not being food friendly it is sobering to note that the big winner in 2007 (Fuller Bodied Dry Red Wine, Best Red Table Wine of Competition and Best Wine of Competition) weighed in at 15% alcohol. And this was achieved against a total of 2000 (international) entries in a variety of classes (and thus alcohol levels).


3) Many who argue against dry wines with alcohol above 14.5% fail to understand a significant point about wine consumption and appreciation. Rich, ripe, fruit forward wines that are ready to drink are preferred by the majority of wine drinkers. I wouldn’t mind betting that many of the folks that are new to wine have the same preference. As these individuals mature and expand their wine experience a number will come to favor lower alcohol wines while others will continue with the other end of the spectrum, and still others will favor wine for its diversity. By limiting the choices of wine drinkers I think there is a good chance of driving many to other beverage choices. So I don’t believe restricting the diversity of wine serves the wine industry at all.


~ Mike

[21]

Michael,

I have seen your blog and feel that the tone of some of your posts directed towards proponents of lower alcohol is rather adversarial. I have also pointed out on your blog that while high alcohol levels in and of themselves are a problem (yes, they are) they are part of a larger syndrome which includes excessive ripeness and the attendant flavors and structure. Sure, the neophyte (and casual) wine drinker tends to prefer whatever wine is more immediately approachable, easier to drink and more cocktail-like. However, not everything popular is good. But it does have a place in the marketplace as you point out.



The issue Corti, Berger , Asimov and others have with this style is that this soft, sweet, fruity, simple, ripe and hot style has become a standard to the point where it has crept into the territory of the $30 and over category of 'premium', 'super-premium' and 'boutique wines' and in fact, has narrowed selection and limited diversity. I posted comments asserting that nobody is attempting to limit wine diversity but to increase it.



I have also invited you to participate in a project exactly like what you describe: project23. I have yet to hear from you about that. At the risk of sounding patronizing, I'll say this: In the scientific world (from which we both hail - you from Scrip and me from clinical medicine) people come together for a meeting of the minds and if they disagree, they do it in a civil manner. Yet some people posting to articles such as this choose to only snipe at the position of proponents of lower alcohol wines. Along with some producers of high-octane wines, they tend to balk at the idea of conducting the very type of tasting you mention. What gives?

[22]

Arthur,

I can see that we will have to continue to disagree on this topic. If my blog posts appear adversarial (and I don’t think they are) then it is quite simply because the individuals you mention propose to limit my access to a specific segment of wine diversity. They don’t propose to test if higher alcohol wines have a place, whether they age, or are food friendly, etc. They simply want them gone. Mine may be a small contribution to this argument, but I refuse to give way to their myopic view of the world of wine.



If fruit forward, ready to drink wines are growing more common in the marketplace then so be it. The marketplace is different than it was decades ago, tastes and styles have changed. The vast majority of wine drinkers are not looking for wines to age, or even to show regional, or varietal character. They simply want something to drink over dinner that night. If you believe that their appreciation of wine is wrong, and should conform to the individuals you have mentioned then so be it. I’m sure the wine industry will applaud your impact on their bottom line. My approach has always been different. The wine neophytes in my circle of friends know that I will always feed their preferences, but that this comes with the price of having to taste and compare other wines. I don’t push the Powerhouse Wine Seekers of America away, I clutch them to my chest. I know I can broaden their wine horizons. I don’t belittle them by calling their wine preferences simple. My mind boggles at the naiveté of the Berger’s, Dunn’s, Corti’s, etc of this world. Unlike some of us they are paid professionals that don’t even realize that some simple, hands-on education is all that most PWSAs need.



I challenge the idea that big wines are poised to reduce diversity, at least in terms of Australia, as recent evidence shows that the “blockbuster” style is beginning to fade. It may be simple nationalism on my part but I can always find examples of how the Australian industry has led in the promotion of wine appreciation; there is no reason why the USA should lag in this aspect. And this is not simply an argument related to research funding. As far as I am aware the examples I quote most often (SIWC, Wine Press Club of NSW, various wine critics) are not supported by government funds.



In terms of project23, it seems to me that this is being stacked in favor of the arguments that you opine; that is simply self-serving. By limiting the wines to be judged to the parameters you have chosen you defeat the purpose of any comparison of the diversity of wine, especially alcohol. I am very unlikely to lend my name to such an endeavor. Instead I will continue to support the contributions of events like The Sydney International Wine Competition (SIWC) where the only restriction is limiting the judging to 2,000 wines.

[23]

Michael,

While I have set parameters to what types of wines we can consider “low alcohol” for project23, I have endeavored to compile controls, or higher alcohol wines for comparison. A blind tasting must include control samples. And there will be controls: high alc ones, de-alced ones, as well as old world wines, because the latter, in many people's minds, represent the gold standard of certain wines.



I do not see how that kind of tasting is stacked against one type of wine versus another. I have also made every effort to (continue to) build a balanced panel with representatives from "both sides of the isle", so to speak. I want this to be a fair contest so I am doing everything I can to make it a level playing ground. I have my preferences. They are not arbitrary or adapted from someone else, but stem from repeated tasting of various wines with different foods. So I could just forgo the hassle and expense and just write an article where I sum up some tasting notes of lower and higher alcohol wines that I tasted with food and make my decree of which is better. Instead, I have recruited wine writers, wine buyers, sommeliers and restaurateurs for the panel. Each of those in attendance will be free to write about the tasting in their own venue. If space permits, I also hope to be able to have some other members of the wine press at the tasting but that depends on logistics of the location, etc. All my efforts notwithstanding, I have encountered a generally dismissive response from powerhouse wine producers and proponents.



I think our scientific minds can actually come together positively here (and with fireworks instead of sparks): We HAVE TO stop using the term “high alcohol”. Yes the ABV is an issue, but so much of the problem with these wines has to do with a nearly progeric development of phenolics and anthocyanins, at times an obscene level of RS and a brittle structure (acids, tannins etc).



Every product has its market and its takers. But many who speak in favor these less ripe, lower alcohol (@#$%^!, gotta stop that) wines realized that, as you point out, the majority of the people who buy wine, want it to be soft (VERY soft), juicy, fruity and sweet. They have also realized that proselytizing about their preferred style of wine is a waste of energy. People just don’t want to be told that the choice they make, (although it brings them pleasure) is not a good one. Additionally, there is a particular resistance in this country to learning “too much” about wine. I can’t understand that. I would be fine with it if that style was not becoming ubiquitous.



All that aside, and with respect for your argument for diversity, I propose this analogy: in any group, organization or society there occur certain trends, behaviors or practices which end up having to be modified or curtailed even if the majority of the group’s members object. This is not the same as stamping out a movement. Rather, a modification of the practice or implementation of some rules or restriction. I can think of no better example than smoking. Nicotine is fantastic! To the smoker it offers much gratification and immediate reward. All the cool people do it and one feels a certain validation when one smokes (well, at first anyways). However, smoking puts a heavy burden on public health and negatively affects those who are not smokers. I am leaving out the toll it takes on the smoker, deferring to one’s right to self determination. So cigarettes are still produced in immense quantities and people who wish to do so may smoke – and many do. I think that besides feeling that this big, powerhouse wine style is present in a vast majority (and growing) of California wines, Asimov, Corti and Berger and others look at the matter from a philosophical point of view and with some sort of tradition in mind. I really don’t think they want to stamp out every last vestige of big, hot sweet, raisiny wine. But they do not want that style to define ALL of California wine.



Every issue has more or less vocal activists across the spectrum of the topic. Ultimately, the resolution of the matter lies along some sort of ‘mean’ of intensities or extremes of the activist positions. Time will tell how this issue resolves (or if it ever does).

[24]

Soooo, I read the piece that Darrell did about over the top wines for
the CAWG meeting. It seems to me he is talking to the wrong crowd.
The growers certainly DON'T want more hang time and high sugars. Oh!
Contraire, they would like to get the fruit off the vines as soon as
possible at as high a tonnage as they can get. It is the WINERIES
that demand the lignified stems, brown seeds, and high sugars.
Shriveled grapes are good for them, bad for the growers, who then get
beaten up about high pH and low tonnage. So Darrell, beat up the big
guys, not the growers.

[25]

I'm probably in the same age bracket as Darrell, and right now, happily buzzed on a wonderful Sonoma-Cutrer Chardonnay, but I'm still able to write a fairly cohesive response to this article. The gist of this 'Give 'em Hell Darrell', is based on this rapid MTV mentality. Quick, quick, let's get it out, without much thought, only for the dollar. This is the same mind-set I see in many of my students, and it distresses me to no end! Maybe I'm simplifying it, but it seems to me to be the same quick-fire gratification mentality. Let's just do the minimal effort, and hopefully make a bunch of money. The discovery is gone, the joy is gone, and the FUN has been removed. The only criteria is the bottom financial line. Back in the day, as the kids say, it had nothing to do with money. In fact, it was all about the fun and the party. Motivation was pure, clear and without motive. Only when something comes from pure of heart and thought does success follow!

[26]

I imagine Darrell doesn't drink much Aussie red, though he appreciates the money being spent down there. 80% of Aussie reds (except for cheap Yellow Tail-like wines) are over 14% alc. Oops, too hot. Could he find ONE Barossa red under that threshold? And though I do find myself yearning for less alcohol in so many wines, there are more than enough choices for everyone. As so many writers have added, it's his ego speaking. Between all the demigods who own wineries and all the demigods who write about them... not a one of them has come up with a cure for cancer. But, damn, they are self-important!