Why Is It Important for a Region to have a Signature Grape??

I was reading EricAsimov's NYTimes article on FingerLake CabFranc:
FLX:CabFranc
and he suggested that one of the reasons LongIsland wines have not taken off is because of their lack of a signature grape (in addition to lack of quality) to establish their "identity" and proposes the success of the FLX CabFranc (in addition to Riesling) as the reason FLX is much more successful than LongIsland.

This got me to thinking (always a danger on a slow Fri morning): Why is it important for a region, especially an emerging region, to have one signature wine??

Eric (rightfully) points out that "few regions in the world flourish with only one signature wine." Clearly BDX=Cabernet/Burg=PinotNoir/Piemonte=Nebbiolo/Germany=Riesling/NapaVlly=Cab. But does that make other regions that don't have a signature grape less successful?? Friuli? Austria (red)? SantaBarbara? Sonoma? RogueVlly? AltoAdige? Macedonia?

To me, a region can be successful with a diversity of grape varieties. I'm always amused by the Paso folks wanting to establish their fame based on Rhone varietals. Baloney...they grow Nebbiolo and Aglianico as well as anywhere....world class.

So...I toss my question out there to all you folks to ponder. Don't lose any sleep over it, though. Obviously in my [stirthepot.gif] mode a bit.

Tom

[Robin Garr]

I think Eric is stirring the pot, and it shows from the top: Burg is not a single-variety region unless you tune out the whites. Bordeaux is not now, and never has been, a 100% Cab region. Its genius is in the blend, and Cab isn't even predominant on the Right Bank. Petrus, anyone? And so it goes. I think he's just trolling for comments.

I think Eric is stirring the pot, and it shows from the top: Burg is not a single-variety region unless you tune out the whites. Bordeaux is not now, and never has been, a 100% Cab region. Its genius is in the blend, and Cab isn't even predominant on the Right Bank. Petrus, anyone? And so it goes. I think he's just trolling for comments.

Maybe. But the reputation of Bordeaux and Burgundy has been long-established.

The situation might be different for newer regions where casual consumers do not yet have a basic image of what to expect. I have no data, but the logic certainly seems intuitive to me that a new region will be an easier sell to the mass public when it has a clearly-identified grape/style/brand. (Of course it would help if the wine was also good...)

Yuh...

some varieties have a benchmark, and if you're buying then that benchmark is what you are comparing against, such as

Malbec = Argentina

Tannat = Uruguay

Sparkling = Champagne

Zinfandel = Lodi (or Amador)

Syrah/Shiraz = Barossa

Sauvignon Blanc = Marlborough

Riesling = Germany or Finger Lakes (I go for latter)

Cabernet Franc = Ontario (this is a personal take, not mainstream)

Those are really your benchmarks!!!???

I can understand how Argentina has come to be associated with malbec among casual consumers. But among geeks as well!

Similarly, shiraz from Australia may be popular and have developed its own style, but surely the Northern Rhone is always the benchmark! I guess the styles are so different that maybe you could make an argument for having two different benchmarks (there are two different words afterall).

But how you catapulted the Finger Lakes above Austria and Alsace remains a mystery!!

I agree with Rahsaan. More impiortant than a "signiture grape" is a "flagship wine".

Salute

[David M. Bueker]

Eric Asimov also presumes that the Figer Lakes is actually more than a niche region. Despite enjoying the wines (I do...wish I could easily find more), I cannot see the region as being established beyond local and limited geek circles.

As for Finger Lakes being a benchmark for Riesling...umm...no.

Those are really your benchmarks!!!???

Yep, my taste, my benchmarks.

Best Riesling I ever had was in Finger Lakes.

Instead of sniping at mine, post your own benchmarks.

(I'd like to know where your benchmark for Malbec is if not Argentina. There's some lovely old vine and single vineyard Malbecs from there.)

Oh, and I'll add Carmenere = Chile while I'm at it and stand back

[David M. Bueker]

Not sure benchmark Carmenere means a heck of a lot, but if it does then Chile is the place.

Regarding Riesling, some benchmarks include:

Dry: Trimbach Clos Ste. Hune
Off-dry: Egon Muller Scharzhofberger Kabinett
Sweet: J. J. Prum Wehlener Sonnenuhr Gold Capsule Auslese

Alternatives for less money:

Dry: Trimbach CFE, or Keller Abtserde
Off-dry: J.J. Prum Wehlener Sonnenuhr Kabinett
Sweet: Robert Weil Kiedricher Grafenberg Auslese

There are a whole lot more that exceed what the Finger Lakes can do right now. I do see the FL making great strides, but they are not there yet. Riesling might be the FL benchmark grape, but it's a low bench.

[David M. Bueker]

Oh, me regarding Malbec, I can see Argentina. There are stylistic issues for the geek community, but it's certainly the benchmark grape for Argentina.

And anyway, these discussions are a little bit backwards from the question. I think it's more "is there a grape this region is known for" versus "is this the best place on Earth for this grape."

Because if it's the former then Argentina=Malbec. If the latter then it might be Argentina=Torrontes.

Best Riesling I ever had was in Finger Lakes.

Which wine?

I've drunk much more extensively in Germany and Austria than in the Finger Lakes. My mother lives in Ithaca so I used to drink a bunch of the top local names and was never all that impressed. I'm sure they've made strides but find it hard to believe that they can consistently outperform the top German/Austrian/Alsatian producers.

(I'd like to know where your benchmark for Malbec is if not Argentina. There's some lovely old vine and single vineyard Malbecs from there.)

I will admit that I don't have a ton of experience with Argentinian malbec. I trust you that there are some lovely wines being made, and I would love to taste them. But when talking about things like 'benchmarks' I'm a traditionalist, so Argentina will always be a spin-off of Cahors in my view (even if the wines eventually are consistently 'better', whatever that means). I mean it was the French who took malbec to Argentina in the first place, seeing how far their benchmark wine of Cahors could be translated into different spin-off climates!

The whole concept of Signature Grape smacks of marketing men - along with World Class, etc. Who cares? Funny, but I always thought the Signature Grapes of LI were supposed to be Merlot and Chard, or at least that's what they were 15 years ago. I think a problem with the LI wine business is that land is too expensive and under development pressure, so that the wines will struggle to obtain decent QPR. Might be true for many parts of CA these days as well.

Getting back to the article on FL Cab Franc: the wines that came out top in their tasting are not ones that immediately spring to mind, so bravo to those producers. I always enjoyed Lakewood's wines, but they are more of a 'blue collar' producer compared with some of the places with greater pretensions. Recently had some of the '12 Damiani CF and it was a fine bottle.

See you talking Cab Fr Joe. Just opened a Chinon from 2012...Les Pensees de Pallus. Very nice, will post TN.

[David M. Bueker]

Of course it's marketing. But it does make sense. If people know an area for a particular grape (e.g. Napa Cabernet) then they gravitate to that area's wines for it, and that can lead to further exploration.

Back to the FL, I don't find all that many people who really understand what Cabernet Franc is, and so while it could be the signature grape, I doubt it would mean much.

Always wish I had closer access to Finger lake!!

The only one of Peter's correlations between region and grape/type with which I agree is Sparkling = Champagne. I hope he is just trying to be provocative. Otherwise I would suspect Europhobia.

To return to the original topic, I am sure that in Europe it helps to give a region/appellation an identifiable character if it is associated with specific grapes or blends of grapes. Just looking at Europe, Bordeaux with its established red and white blends, Burgundy with PN and Chardonnay, N.Rhône with Syrah, Langhe with Nebbiolo, Tuscany with Sangiovese, Beaujolais with Gamay, Anjou and Touraine with CabFranc and Chenin, Mosel/Nahe/Rheingau with Riesling, Rioja & Ribera del Duero with Tempranillo........ Even lesser appellations gain from association with specific grapes, e.g. Madiran/Tannat (sorry Peter), Jurançon/G&P Manseng, Marcillac /Fer Servadou, Bierzo/Mencia.......It seems to me that regions with a greater diversity of grapes, e.g. Languedoc and Friuli, have more of a struggle to assert identity.

Perhaps it's different in the New World where very few grapes are native or nearly so. Zinfandel, Pinotage and Carmenère are specific (or almost) to California, S.Africa and Chile, but I don't think that any regions there would see them as their flagship varieties.

When I first moved to upstate NY,not that far from the Finger Lakes, Joe Moryl was kind enough to be my tour guide re the FL wineries..I wd take a printout of his emails with us when my wife and I toured the FL's..Would agree with his assessment of Lakewood..Decent but not exciting wines, primarily a white wine house. Damiani is far and away the best Cab Franc I have tasted from the FL wineries..Tasted through a number of FL CF's at tastings hosted by Cornell U Alumni Assoc and while some were decent, none of them were on a par with Damiani..and none on a par with the CF's I tasted last year at Macari, Bedell, Paumonock and Wolffer on Long Island. 30 years ago,I thought the LI wines were better than those of the FL area and lo these many years later, have not seen any reason to change that impression..Will give FL the nod re Rieslings but LI quite a bid better re Chards, Sauv Blancs, Cab Franc, Cab Sauv, Merlot and dry Roses, (made from either CF or Cab Sauv or blends).

At the Cornell tastings, only FL wines are presented, and Damiani was not represented.. Hermann Wiemer was the best CF that I tasted, wd call it at least a notch , if not 2, below Damiani..that said, I am a big fan of a number of Wiemer whites.

My votes for benchmark syrah: J. L. Chave Hermitage; Auguste Clape Cornas.

Benchmark pinot noir: red Burgundy rules here, hands down. In Burgundy it's really the producer rather than the appellation that matters, and I can't make up my mind regarding a definitive benchmark list. But I think the DRC, Faiveley, and Jadot have to be on it.

-Paul W.

I took it from the title of the post that it was about the signature grape of the region

Which I understand to mean the grape that does best in the region.

My list has been taken the other way around, that I was suggesting the best expression of that grape is found in that region. Understandably because of how I phrased the introductory sentence, and indeed as I wrote the list I started twisting it around myself.

Some on my list stand as the variety that is the signature grape of the region,
Malbec for Argentina, and Riesling for Finger Lakes, but that doesn't preclude those grapes also being the signature grape of other regions, obviously Malbec is the signature grape of Cahor and Riesling, well, regions in Germany and also Alsace.

So
Region and its signature grape

Argentina = Malbec
Uruguay = Tannat
Lodi = Zinfandel
Amador = Zinfandel
Barossa = Shiraz
Marlborough = Sauvignon Blanc
Finger Lakes = Riesling
Ontario = Cabernet Franc
Virginia = Viognier

Much of Europe already has signature grapes, recognised by various appellations, so there's no point in stating them here .

The above regions can grow any variety, and many do. Lodi grows more than 100, but I reckon the above are their signature grapes.

Anyway, we've started a discussion

Aha, that is a different story!