WTN: An Hermitage + Questions on New Oak

Cave Tain l'Hermitage Hermitage "Gambert de Loche" 2000 13,5% 49,90€

I got a brief sip of this today. It is a "prestige" cuvée from Cave Tain l'Hermitage dedicated to the founder of the company and made from old vines and 100% new wood. That last part to me sounds quite awful, so I proceeded with caution.

After I get past the shock-wave of the combined effects of new oak and huge ripeness that seems typical of '00s (vanilla, toffee, sugary sweetness, ink), I found myself enjoying the other parts of the wine. It had dark, obviously Syrah aromas, quite a bit of olive and bacon. The structure was refreshing with soft but plentiful tannins and quite good acidity also despite the sweet fruit and warm year feel of the wine. Long and quite mineral aftertaste. Though much too oaky for my taste, I am happy that I did see an obvious Hermitageness underneath.

I really loved what I saw underneath the oak. So now my questions: Is there a purpose for the new oak? What, other than for me unpleasant aromatics, does new oak bring to the wine i.e. why won't old/neutral wood do? Is it really just a matter of tastes and fashions or are there more reasons for using new wood? Is it do with hygiene?

-Otto

The oak extraction from a new barrel diminishes over time, so that by the time the barrel is 3 years old it is almost neutral. Also, the higher the alcohol, the greater the extraction. Over time in the bottle, the oakiness (oak tannin) integrates into the wine and becomes less dominant. Some folks may like exactly what you tasted. However, I think you'd like a wine such as this in about 2020.

Cave Tain l'Hermitage Hermitage "Gambert de Loche" 2000 13,5% 49,90€


After I get past the shock-wave of the combined effects of new oak and huge ripeness that seems typical of '00s (vanilla, toffee, sugary sweetness, ink),

I suspect that these elements which you mention in brackets are pleasing to the majority of consumers and tend to be regarded by them as the norm for "premium" wine. Yes, they do diminish personality and a sense of place and they are actively displeasing to many of us (even more, I think, to you than to me) but I think that this is largely a wine geek's perception and to a less extent a generational thing. My sister, who is far from a wine geek but was brought up before the new oak invasion from the 80s onwards, dislikes the flavours as much as I do.

...before the new oak invasion from the 80s onwards...

Am I missing something here? Lafite (and I assume many other Bordeaux producers) has been aging their wines for 2 years in new French oak barrels for a long time and I've never heard of it being an issue. Does the Hermitage use a different type of oak? I know some winemakers have a schedule for limited oak extraction when using new barrels by aging a portion of the wine for say 3 months, then replacing with more wine for say 5 months, then again with another filling for say 8 months, etc.

...before the new oak invasion from the 80s onwards...

Am I missing something here? Lafite (and I assume many other Bordeaux producers) has been aging their wines for 2 years in new French oak barrels for a long time and I've never heard of it being an issue. Does the Hermitage use a different type of oak? I know some winemakers have a schedule for limited oak extraction when using new barrels by aging a portion of the wine for say 3 months, then replacing with more wine for say 5 months, then again with another filling for say 8 months, etc.

When I first started drinking wine in the late 50s through to the 70s, new oak flavours were rare and not sought by producers or consumers. My understanding is that most producers used barrels at least four times and often more so that the new barrel content was less than 25% and those would be unlikely to have had a high flavour imparting toast. Some rich estates like Lafite-Rothschild and DRC may have used a higher proportion of new barrels but in way to minimise the wood flavours which the intensity of their wine would mask in any case. Some producers even broke in their new barrels on inferior wine. The first wines I can recall with overt oak flavours were some Riojas in the 70s.

Otto,
It is certainly due to hygene to some degree - and fashion - and a winemaker's decision that the wine will benefit from the exposure. At any point along that process, a mistake can be made.
Best, Jim

It is certainly due to hygene to some degree[...]

I recently read on the "scary board" that new oak can carry TCA as well and isn't necessarily better at eliminating faults than old barrels, so what sort of differences in hygiene are there with old and new oak? Are the aromas that I find in e.g. old style Rioja and Musar partly due to the hygienic faults - do I simply like "bad" wine?

-O

...Are the aromas that I find in e.g. old style Rioja and Musar partly due to the hygienic faults - do I simply like "bad" wine?

-O

I'm don't know about Musar, but I believe Rioja is aged in American oak, which is quite different from French oak, which is the mildest. I believe Hungarian oak is somewhere in between.

As best I can tell, oak (of whatever origin) can impart aromas and flavors of vanilla as well as herbal characteristics (eucalyptus, mint, etc.), and can correct vegetal aromas. As a general rule, American oak is more robust, and is the source of the characteristic vanilla perfume of Rioja. French oak effects are more subtle. As already noted, the effect of an oak barrel depends on how many times it has been used, and also on how it was treated during cooperage. "Toasted" oak, for example, imparts less flavor (I've always found this counterintuitive, but there ya go).

It is my understanding that many barrels sold as "Alliers" or "Nevers" are in fact made from wood that may have come from locations outside France (including Slovenia). I've also read that there are Rioja and Ribera Del Duero producers who buy raw lumber in the US and then make barrels on site at the winery.

As for the aesthetics of oak, my tastes have certainly changed. I find heavily oaked California Chardonnay (Du Mol comes to mind) undrinkable. I don't much care for Montrachet that shows a lot of oak character, either. On the other hand, Rioja without oak (AlBiker, for example) just doesn't seem right. I also find that cool-climate syrahs (like Hermitage ) benefit from some oak aging--although not as aggressive as what Otto describes.

PS: Here's a <a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3488/is_11_82/ai_80234989">link</a> to more than you probably ever wanted to know about wine barrels.

It is my understanding that many barrels sold as "Alliers" or "Nevers" are in fact made from wood that may have come from locations outside France (including Slovenia). I've also read that there are Rioja and Ribera Del Duero producers who buy raw lumber in the US and then make barrels on site at the winery.

As I understand it, the species of oak is the most important consideration for the the grain and permeability of the wood as well as for the imparting of flavours, for those who want them. "French" oak is "quercus petraea", commonly called sessile or durmast oak, and stands of this species are found in many European countries. A lot of "Slovenian" oak is "quercus robur", also known as English or common oak, which was used for centuries to construct British fleets due to its tight grain and to its rot resistant properties; "q. petraea" was used by the French for the same purpose (with less success in battle; flag waving!). I am not sure what species is used for Hungarian barrels but there is a species, "q.frainetto" which is commonly known as the Hungarian oak. Baltic oak, which was most prized of all before World War 1 was, I think, "q. petraea". Of course French foresters and coopers now claim that the terroir in their various "q. petraea" stands contributes extra and distinct qualities. Apocryphally I have heard that a lot of Eastern European stands have been damaged by war (bullets, shell splinters, etc.) as well as by communist mismanagement but this may be a rumour spread around by French foresters.

The American species used for barrels is, I think, "q. alba", which is difficult to grow in Europe.

As far as I am concerned the less oak flavours the better, so my interest lies in learning which species and cooperage techniques contribute the least.

(BTW, Hermitage from the Chapoutier firm before its present generation was matured in barrels made of "châtaignier" which, subject to correction, is "castanea sativa", commonly known as Spanish chestnut. I have had a bottle recently bought on Ebay which was very good; in those days the Chapoutiers did not put a vintage on their top cuvées but it must have dated from before the mid-80s.)

It is certainly due to hygene to some degree[...]

I recently read on the "scary board" that new oak can carry TCA as well and isn't necessarily better at eliminating faults than old barrels, so what sort of differences in hygiene are there with old and new oak? Are the aromas that I find in e.g. old style Rioja and Musar partly due to the hygienic faults - do I simply like "bad" wine?

-O

Otto,
Quite so.
Also brett and other nasties can be transported in new wood. Not as often as in old, I'd bet, but nonetheless . . .
Its a jungle out there and the only way I know to keep the wee beasties from taking charge of one's wine is to let independent labs. do their testing and for winemakers to do what is required by the results of such tests. And sometimes, that ain't pretty.
Best, Jim