2. On the nose - flavour (1) On the palate - feeling (structure) and flavour (2)
3. Flavour Plus = Quality
4. Shape matters
5. Temperature matters
Easy. Like food, place wine at the front of the mouth and leave - chew softly once or twice - and wait, breathing normally.
image Anita Foard
]]>
Image Anita Foard
]]>Light Red – another common Australian style, usually >13% alc. And without a dry ‘finish”. Has a ‘see through’ red colour. Often made by ‘bleeding’ (the French call running off’) in the process of making two wines, one heavier (ie a BIG red), the other lighter. A goof light bodied “quaffing wine’ suitable for roast chicken or pork, not unlike an inferior Pinot Noir wine.
True Rosé - or in the French manner. Pale. Delicate with a subtle dry finish and usually <13%alc. Made like a white wine but using red grapes-crushing then pressing then fermenting the juice (ie little or no skin contact). Serve chilled. This is a fresh frivolous wine, not to be aged, to be enjoyed at Summer lunchtimes at picnics or late afternoons with entrées. It is not a surprise that 40% of the wine sold at Supermarkets in France is Rosé. Worth paying $20 - $30/bottle.
First published for the International Rose Festival Morwell November 2019
Image Cedit Anita Foard
]]>
Traditionally wine has been regarded in part as something to wash down food, but in our recent indulgent times the idea of ‘matching ‘ food and wine has grown. Similar to the homeopathic (herbal) medicine principle of ‘like with like’, so simple foods with simple wines, rich wines with rich foods etc. White wines do go well with fish and chicken and poorly with red meats, while red wines taste metallic with fish but fine with steak. In reality foods and wines are each mixtures of textures and flavours and finding a compatible combination from so many contrasting ingredients can be challenging. Often it is a ‘try it and see’ situation. What if we brought together two famously flavoursome “11 Rivers” products – wine and cheese? Will they hit it off, become a couple, or will they argue, fail to communicate and be incompatible? So on the afternoon of Monday, 26th October 2009 we gathered to try and answer this eternal question. ”We” are the cheesemaker Ferial Zekiman (Maffra Cheese) and Terry-Anne Gaskin (Capra Organic Goats Cheese), with Fleur Dawkins (Glenmaggie Wines) and myself (Ken Eckersley, winemaker at Nicholson River Winery). Our host and independent judge is Brad Neilson of the Tinamba Hotel.
First we had to agree on what was a ‘match’ and how we were going to go about the exercise. Considering that there are two aspects of food/wine in the mouth; the feeling of sweet, salt, acid, bitter and savoury on the tongue and the aroma/flavour aspect detected in the nose as we breathe out. There had to be compatibility then at two levels – a balance or even an enhancement of their features in the mouth and nose. A mismatch would be when the wine/cheese appeared to cancel each other out or even brought out something unpleasant in the other. The method chosen was to taste the cheese and then to follow with the wine – and wait. (A spittoon was used – otherwise we would not survive the rigor of some 30 cheese/wine tastings!). We discussed each one to reach a consensus.
Initially there was disagreement and even confusion but as each of us got the gist of the experience, our perceptions sharpened and we seemed to speak as one.
The first bracket was two Capra goat cheeses: the “Mountain Ash” – fresh, salty and creamy; and “Serenade”- mature, strongly flavoured, earthy with a white rind. Seven wines of various styles were tried with each. The powerful “Serenade” was matched with the similarly complex 2006 Montview Chardonnay (Nicholson River), an oaked soft style, and the 2003 Botrytis Semillon (Nicholson River), coming through as enjoyable combinations. The “Mountain Ash” was kinder and the unoaked 2007 Glenmaggie Chardonnay brought out its creaminess, while with the 2006 Nicholson River Pinot Noir, they gently complemented each other.
Noticeably very dry styles like Sauvignon Blanc and Sparkling seemed to ‘vanish’.
The second bracket was five Maffra Cheeses and they were tasted with three dry red styles and a sweet botrytised white. Normandie Brie (soft white with mouldy rind) – The creamy interior seemed compatible with several wines but when the mouldy exterior was taken into account only the 2006 Glenmaggie Cabernet Sauvignon shone through. Mature Cheddar (18 months) – a friendly cheese to the red wine styles, with the Nicholson River Pinot Noir and Syrah and the Glenmaggie Cabernet Sauvignon all coming up well. The following three cheeses were complex and intensely flavoured – Glenmaggie Blue (matured for 2 months), Glenmaggie Blue (7 months) and Raclette; only the likewise complex and intensely flavoured Botrytis Semillon (Nicholson River) could join them in a memorable oral and nasal experience! The exception was the mix of the young Blue with Nicholson River Syrah, a particularly flavoursome combination. Otherwise it seems the more traditional Australian tannic red styles are best kept away from the complex cheeses.
The two and a half hours of concentrated chewing/tasting/spitting passed quickly; it was a pleasure to share the experience with such dedicated sensualists! All the cheeses and wines by themselves were a delight, but when you put them together there can be a synergy, something more than each has to offer.
Our host, Brad Neilson has the last word: “Is it common knowledge that red wine goes with cheese??? Matching food and wine is one of the most difficult and subjective things to get right…. Most of us open a bottle of red and expect it to match most of the cheese on the plate; we found this was seldom the case…. It can be also said it is about personal taste, but when paired up wine and cheese can do something special that brings out the best in each other, even the experts can’t agree on any absolutes in the cheese and wine matching game…. Try it for yourself at your next dinner party; you may be pleasantly surprised at your findings…. We were!!!!!!“
Ken Eckersley
]]>The language of eating and drinking is very confusing – taste; flavour and palate words seem to be interchangeable to food and wine writers. “Tasteless” and “flavourless” have the same definition in the dictionary, as do “tasteful”, “flavourful” and “flavoursome”, whilst “aftertaste” is a word, but “afterflavour” is not. I find it useful to go back to their origin in old French; the word “taste” derives from “touch”, the initial contact on the tongue; and “flavour” from the word “savour”, the idea being the continuing experience in the mouth and nose (the finish).
Food, like wine, is a combination of these elements. Each food can have a range of aromas, with accompanying mouthfeel – the softness, texture, warmth and so on. I regard wine as “liquid food”, which does makes it seem more like a soup! I have been advocating for some time that wine should be eaten (see my article) rather than drunk because of their similar mix of aromas and textures. To eat wine is to do exactly what you do with food – keep your head level, place the wine at the front of the mouth (don’t swallow), chew and wait. People who drink wine as if it is a beverage like water or beer, under experience wine by not receiving the full pleasure that it can offer. This is very common.
So, in response to the question about which wine goes with which food, the answer is that there are four possibilities, the same as for many matches whether they be for clothes or even finding a partner;
Obviously good human partnerships are complex but would expect to have a preponderance of (3) and (4)! ; although occasionally may dip into (1) and (2). The reality of food and wine matching is simpler, like seafood with a heavy red wine, a (1) – it just doesn’t work. Much more common are the experiences (2) and (3). A (2) would be almost any wine with a curry, when you may as well be drinking water. While experiences (3) and (4) are preferred, it is the latter that is truly memorable. Favourite number (4) experiences of mine are smoked salmon with an oaked Chardonnay, or Syrah with a roast lamb.
The guiding principle is “like goes with like”, meaning that the food and wine have something in common, or an overlap, in a dominant aspect of their respective mixtures. In this way, something sweet will match with a sweet wine, white wine with white meats, red wine with red meats, delicate soups with a delicate wine, spicy with spicy and so on. That will take you so far, but again realities and experience indicate that there are many caveats to this principle.
Here are my variations and suggestions:
Nevertheless there are still some popular combinations:
Unoaked Chardonnay– seafood, chicken | Pinot Noir– duck, rabbit, kangaroo, pork |
Oaked Chardonnay– smoked salmon, rich seafood, spicy chicken, pork | Cool Climate Shiraz (Syrah)– lamb, beef, pasta |
Riesling– seafood, chicken | Cabernet Merlot– lamb, beef, pasta |
Semillon/Sauvignon Blanc– shellfish | Traditional Australian Sweet (e.g. Muscat)– desserts |
Sparkling– wide use, esp. as a palate cleanser and with entrees. | Botrytis Sweet Whites– foie gras, blue cheese |
Ultimately it is your experience and you are an expert on yourself. Just enjoy!
Ken Eckersley
Winemaker & Viticulturist
Nicholson River Winery
nrw@nicholsonriverwinery.com.au
www.nicholsonriverwinery.com
+61-3-5156 8241
August 2011 (updated March 2013)
On the occasion of Toby Puttock’s cooking demonstration in Bairnsdale, East Gippsland
Image Credit Anita Foard
]]>
For years I have had a bad reaction to wine, or rather to its preservative (sulphur dioxide, food codes 220, 223, 224). The symptoms would be feeling flushed and thirsty, palpitations and headaches, usually appearing in the early hours of the morning; sort of a hangover even though only a glass had been drunk. It made for a miserable day ahead from lack of sleep.
My observation over 35 years of talking to people at our cellar door is that I am far from alone – perhaps 10-15% of people who drink wine have a reaction that concerns them and limits their interest in enjoying wine.
Another observation is that some people react only to white wine, others to red and some to both. This is an interesting question, and in the absence of any real explanation from researchers, I will offer my own theory.
The sulphur dioxide is present in different forms in red and white wines. The acid in white wine ensures a gaseous, volatile form of sulphur dioxide whilst in red wine it is bound to the red pigments, forming a compound that approximates the once widely used anti-biotic “Sulpha Drugs”. So asthma prone individuals can easily have a reaction to white wines whilst people who are allergic or been treated by sulpha drugs can respond to red wines.
One other possible response to red wines could be the presence of “Histamines”, a chemical created by bacteria and present in a range of fermented foods and drinks (eg. salami, beer). Nowadays, with careful acid control, histamine levels in red wines are very low or non-existent.
Alcohol is a muscle relaxant, but also a diuretic (ie makes you pee). Excessive drinking of alcoholic beverages, without topping yourself up with water can induce dehydration (thirstiness) and headaches, that we associate with a hangover. Generally though, with small amounts of consumption, like a glass or two, any feeling of being unwell is more likely to be caused by the preservative.
I am still able to enjoy wine because of some practices that I would commend to others:
1) Never drink young wines (1 to 3 years old), cask, cheap dry and sparkling wines or sweet wines. They have the highest levels of preservative, which is there to protect the wine from infection and oxidation, but suppresses aroma and flavour.
2) Do drink mature, older wines. The preservative levels in wine decays with time. It is at its highest at bottling, then slowly fades away until after about 5-6 years it is very low. From then is the best time to drink wine anyhow.
3) Commercial drops (Pharmaceutical grade 3% Hydrogen Peroxide) are readily available in bottle shops and need to be used precisely. It is strictly one drop per 150 ml glass of young wine to remove all the preservative. If you put one drop into 100ml or into 150 ml of an older wine you will strip out all its flavours and the wine will taste watery. One drop into 250 ml of a 4 or 5 year old wine is about right.
THE PURPOSE OF SULPHUR DIOXIDE
Sulphur dioxide around the world is used at every stage in the making of wine. From adding to the fruit bins as the grapes are picked, as they are juiced and so on, until the wine is bottled.
The purpose is twofold. To protect the grapes and wine from unwanted microbial infection and to limit the oxidation of precious flavour compounds, which gives each wine its distinctive character. With the modern concerns about hygiene and public rejection of spoiled and tainted food products, the growth in sulphur dioxide use has grown in step with modern scientific wine making, that owes much to Louis Pasteur (late 19th Century).
Traditionally wines were consumed quickly, certainly within a year, and by modern standards table wines were rough, often bitter, earthy or vinegary. Fortified wines (with added brandy) were often preferred because the higher alcohol protected the sweet wine from infection.
The use of small additions of sulphur dioxide helped transform the industry to the clean, fresh, flavoursome products in a bottle that we take for granted today.
The issue now is whether it is being overused and consideration should be given to its use only when necessary or in lesser amounts. Sulphur dioxide is a potent chemical and even its presence in wine at parts per million is becoming recognised as a potential health hazard.
NATURAL WINE ( See Postscript)
Into the controversy over the additions and interference in the wine making process has come a movement, mainly in Europe, who believe there should be no additions of any type, especially sulphur dioxide. ”Natural Wine “ is difficult to define and there is no certification for it anywhere in the world.
The European Commission is the only jurisdiction to have certification for “Organic Wines” and sulphur dioxide addition is permitted at a low level.
Australia has Organic and Biodynamic Certification for vineyards but not for wine. So wines labelled “Organic” do contain some sulphur dioxide.
My experience of European Natural Wines is that they are different, perhaps a little raw and on the margin of what would usually be regarded as ‘faulty’. Definitely for the believer rather than the connoisseur.
Here is the label meaning of sulphur dioxide additions:
No Sulphite Addition | None added at any stage |
Sulphite Free/Preservative Free | None detectable |
Low Sulphites | less than about half legal rate |
Sulphites Added | less than legal rate |
Organic and Biodynamic | less than legal rate |
Written by Ken Eckersley October 2018
Postscript in April 2020:
The French Government has just announced a new Certification for Natural Wines, "Vin Méthode Nature", that is sure to be followed worldwide.
Their definition of Natural Wine is that the grapes are grown in a certified organic vineyard, been handpicked and fermented using indigenous yeasts.
As for the preservative, there are two types of Natural Wines. One where there has been no sulphite additions and the other where up to 30ppm can be added after fermentation.
April 2020 - The French Government has just announced Written by Ken Eckersley, October 2018
Image Credit Anita Foard
]]>
by Ken Eckersley
With appreciation to the late Professor Emile Peynaud
We all eat, drink, smell perfumes and know the experience of bitterness (which is just as well as many plant poisons are bitter). Yet there is still mystery about the operation of these senses. The ‘simple’ act of enjoying a glass of wine is really a complex physiological one and also has personal and social overtones. Observe how people can have difficulty sharing their experience of a wine, whether it is uncertainty over what they are feeling or trying to find the ‘right’ words.
Listen to the ‘experts’, look at their written words and you will see words like ‘flavour’ and ‘taste’ used interchangeably and ‘palate’ and ‘aroma’ could also be thrown into the fuzzy mix. They are confused too. It used to be simple, when we borrowed the French words ‘touch’ for ‘taste’ and ‘savour’ for ‘flavour’, but that was in the time of Chaucer. So to clarify the language and make better sense of the experience of wine, the following words are explained.
Let’s start with swirling the wine under the nose and inhaling; it is the nasal receptors that detect the smell/ odour/aroma/bouquet. When the wine touches the palate (tongue, mouth lining) the brain moves up a gear. The taste is a combination of the sensation of mouthfeel (i.e. cold, acid, sweet, bitter, dry, savoury) that can be interpreted by the cortex as ‘structural concepts’ such as shape, weight, balance, texture, and flavour (Peynaud: ‘the aroma in the mouth’) deriving from the volatiles liberated by the warmth (37C) and large surface area of the mouth. They are sucked up the retro-nasal passage by air being breathed out and across the nasal sensors for a second time. (The reverse is known but uncommon—aroma alone producing mouthfeel).
Flavour is the same as aroma except the source is different (glass versus mouth, inhale to exhale). It can also be more diverse and persistent while the shorter lived aromas can be more intense as the brain is focusing on just one sense.
Naturally if a wine is rushed through the mouth there is little opportunity for flavour to be detected and only the mouthfeel is perceived. The difficulty when tasting is that two sense organs are being stimulated and are competing for our conscious attention. Skill and concentration are required to focus on one or the other; if, say, a strong tannic red is tasted, it is hard for subtle flavours to be noticed.
Current research has focused on ‘super-tasters’ who have more tongue sensors; they rarely drink wine as the experience is so overwhelming. Generally women are more sensitive than men and Caucasians are the least of the racial groups. Given the decline in the senses as we age it makes understandable the preference for ‘obvious’ wines like BIG reds among older Caucasian males!
The nerve pathways from the nose and mouth are very different. The mouth discerns only a handful of possible responses that go to the main brain which can respond to excesses with the feeling of pain. The nasal senses have their own part of the brain, via the ‘olfactory bulb’, with the reported ability to discriminate 10,000 odourants. The circuitry involves the ‘primitive’ pleasure, emotional part of the forebrain—a powerful area that can draw upon memory, associations, sexual arousal, danger etc. Reportedly 1% of a person ‘s DNA is tied to the sense of smell, the same as for the immune system.
A device to assist focusing on the concurrent tasting sensations is to momentarily pause breathing. Flavour detection ceases and only the mouthfeel or structure will be apparent; then resume breathing and the flavour will surge. As flavour is apparent only on the exhale part of the breathing cycle, it will pulse.
Then there is the aftertaste, the sensations that remain after the wine has left the mouth. As before there will be the after-flavour and the after-feeling, which are time extensions; lingering longer is an essential part of a quality wine. After-flavour builds up with repeated tastes and reflects superior fruit good oak and careful winemaking. After-feeling can be a steady softness, dryness or cleanness (especially in white wines) and probably derives from high extract and management of the tannin regime (in red wines) —both strongly influenced by winemaking practices. Good winemaking is always evident in a balanced, soft mouthfeel.
Returning to the theme of describing wines, the following three different examples follow the definitions set out above:
So much for the complexities. Keep it simple; this is the Lord’s Prayer of how to go about enjoying wine: Pour the wine into a generous glass (not XL5) and swirl it under your nose and inhale; then place a small portion at the front of the mouth and move the tongue as if eating, and wait. The wine will reveal all. One drinks beer, and water, but wine is better eaten.
KEN ECKERSLEY is the winemaker at Nicholson River Winery.
REFERENCES: Burr, C. (2002) The Emperor of Scent, Random House.
Clarke, R.J. and Bakker, J. (2o04) Wine Flavour Chemistry, Blackwells.
Peynaud, Emile (1987) The Taste of Wine, Macdonald Orbis.
WINE INDUSTRY JOURNAL VOL 19 NO 6 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2004
Image Credit Anita Foard
]]>This article includes some simple exercises to learn how to “eat” wine.
]]>Exercise 1:
Place a quality red wine in an ISO/XL5 glass (small tulip or port). First, have a drink of water, and then taste the wine as you would normally do. Now try this: place a small portion of wine at the front of the mouth i.e. at the tip of the tongue. Leave it there and gently chew, without swallowing or holding your breath. Wait.
This is “eating” wine, precisely what you normally do with food!
If you perceive no difference at all between the two wine experiences, then it is likely that you have been eating wine all along, which is what smart tasters already unconsciously practise. Observe yourself in the mirror or watch others taste. You will notice that many people throw a wine into the mouth and swallow quickly or even lift their nose like they are about to swallow a sword! It is educational watching the different ways in which people drink wine and then listen to their description. How people drink determines their experience. That is to say that the quicker the swallow, the less flavour they discern, although they do pick up on mouthfeel. The main characteristic of popular wine styles is that it makes an impression or is obvious, no matter how the wines are drunk. They have either aromas that leap out of the glass or enough tannin to give a definite feeling. It is with the more flavoursome or subtle wines (and perhaps more expensive?) that one hears comments like, “not much there” or the abysmal “it’s not me”.
However, if there is a difference, like a softer mouthfeel or more intense and lingering flavours, then you have made a discovery.
To understand why this eating of wine offers more than simply drinking requires a review of the whole sensory process. We are already very familiar with the stimulation of the senses by wine; the colours to the eye and the aromas to the nose, but in the mouth it is more complicated. Many people believe that this third experience happens entirely in the mouth and use confused expressions like “mid or end palate flavours”, “soft flavours”, “lemon acidity”, “creamy texture”, “silky spicy tannins” and so on. In fact, the mouth is the conduit to two sense organs; the mouth itself (i.e. the tongue plus lining) and the nose (smell receptors) for the second time. Of course, these senses are competing for your conscious attention (more on this later…!).
Knowledge of how our senses function is an evolving area, but the following makes use of the little we do know. It has recently been understood that there is a nerve at the tip of the tongue that warns the rest of the system to prepare itself as the wine enters the 37°C environment. If the wine lands on the middle of the tongue, the experience will be diminished because the sensors are not ready.
Wine is a mixture and as it rapidly spreads across the tongue it stimulates the various receptors- acid, sweet, bitter, cold etc. while the tannins react with the saliva to give a perceived dryness. All of this mouthfeel information (viz. “taste”) goes to the back of the brain, checked by the amygdala for bitterness (poison?), and then the cortex constructs from these components a sense of balance/unbalance, the structure, and texture. In the warm oral environment of the mouth the aromas have been liberated and move to the back of the mouth where they are whooshed out through the nose. This is the reverse direction of when the wine was smelt in the glass, the aroma, and, I propose, deserves its own word: “bacaroma”(!).
Note that as we breathe back in, there is no aroma; it is only in the breathe out part of the cycle. So, the perception of bacaroma pulses, in harmony with our breathing. This contrasts with the mouthfeel, which is a continuous and declining experience. We call the combination of taste/mouthfeel and bacaroma the “flavour”. If you have a cold or hold your breath, then you will only perceive mouthfeel.
Exercise 2:
Taste the wine as in Exercise 1 and breathe out. When breathing back in, hold the breath for a few seconds, focus on it, and you will become aware of the mouthfeel. You then breathe out. Any bacaroma will come in over the top. If there is no difference between the breath in/breathe out experience then the bacaroma has ceased (i.e. the wine is considered “short”) or is unperceivable. If there is a difference, and it lasts several breaths out, then it is said that the wine has “lingering flavours”. Basically, breathe in = mouthfeel/structure; breathe out = flavour/bacaroma.
I have met former footballers with a history of nose damage who, not surprisingly, only appreciate sweet or big tannic wines and are unaware of the aroma aspect. Other styles seem invisible to them. The sense of smell is vital from the point of view of mankind’s evolution. It has its own part of the brain (olfactory bulb), can discriminate 10 000 different odourants, has the same amount of DNA as the immune system (1%), is linked to the forebrain and can draw on memory, emotions, sex, pleasure etc., and is apparently the only sense that need not deteriorate with age! Although sickness and physical injury can easily damage this sensitive organ.
Imagine going to an Art Gallery and everyone is talking about the frames but not the paintings!? The Archibald or Turner Art Prize goes to the painting with the biggest frame! The equivalent in wine is considering only the structure and sidelining the aroma/bacaroma/flavour aspect, like the colour and substance of the painting.
The longer journey of the mouth aroma impulses finally meet in the cortex with the other mouth messages, except the they are now out of sync, maybe by a fraction of a second! Under what we could call “The First Principle of the Senses”, it is a case of first in, best dressed. That is to say that the mouthfeel will make the initial impression and if it is strong will obscure the perception of bacaroma.
Our consciousness is easily overloaded; try reading a book as you listen to the radio or having a conversation while watching TV. Although there are individual variations, it is a fact that as we age, the ability to focus with our senses is reduced, and it is widely accepted that women have a better ability to multitask (as well as having a more sensitive sense of smell!)
The balance of the mouthfeel components is well known and has become a speciality of the Bordeaux approach, especially their concept of “suppleness”. However, there is a second balance, between mouthfeel and bacaroma. Beyond a certain point, bacaroma will be overlooked in heavy mouthfeel wines- it is possible to be too big!
Notice how the aroma in the glass seems to “disappear” on the palate with big wines, despite the 15-20°C increase in the mouth, which you would expect to enhance aroma. Heavy bodied wines in barrel have an amazing ability to absorb new oak flavours. It takes perhaps a minute after tasting such a wine before there is a sudden burst of bacaroma, after the mouth feeling has ebbed (the so-called “peacock’s tail”?). Another example of an unbalanced wine style are the reputed “fruit driven” ones that have strong up-front aromas with little mouthfeel and bacaroma, such as many popular sauvignon blancs.
Winemakers have to deal with grape varieties from differing climate zones that can each pose a challenge. Typically warm area wines can tend to high alcohol and tannin with baked fruit or low aromas, whereas Tasmania struggles with high acid and under ripe tannins, whilst alpine valleys and New Zealand’s south island can have both high acid and high alcohol.
The ideal would be a balance between mouthfeel and bacaroma where both can be perceived, with their length being indicators of quality.
Writing as a winemaker and a viticulturist, the former’s responsibility is to create a balanced structure without losing the fruit flavours, and perhaps enhancing them with oak and yeasts. In my view, it is the viticulturist who delivers the quality fruit, which primarily determines the richness of flavours of a memorable wine. It is possible to say, “This is a well made wine, but not a good one” i.e. the wine is balanced and has structure, but lacks flavour.
Balance is satisfying, structure tells you about the wine’s ability to age and aroma/bacaroma gives the pleasure and memory.
In summary, to improve your wine experience:
Let’s drink beer and water, but eat wine!
Ken Eckersley
Winemaker & Viticulturist
Nicholson River Winery
The Judges comments on this result included, “interesting to see how Chardonnay styles are evolving. You can still say it’s ‘Australian Chardonnay’, but they are elegant, classy……these wines are genuine alternatives to good Burgundy……
Different to what restaurants expected of this category 20 years ago”.
The Australian Golds went to 2 Tasmanian, 2 Western Australian and 1 Victorian wines.
Comments about the Nicholson River included, “A unanimous choice for our tasting panel, and ‘a wine of a different level, with great oak use and freshness of fruit, golden apple, pineapple and vanilla notes’, according to team leader Laurent Richet MS, with Tate Catering’s Hamish Anderson noting ‘lemon peel, wax and honey, an old school feel with toast and cream, depth of flavour and generosity’. Agustin Trapero of Avenue found ‘complex ripe mango and mandarins, with white chocolate notes and yoghurt texture’. ‘Huge depth and intensity, such a lovely mouthfiller, fab wine,’ concluded Richard Brooks of Caroline Catering.”
Nicholson River Winery in East Gippsland was established in 1978 has been long known for its Chardonnays and was voted nine times “Victoria’s most popular White Wine” in the 90’s.
Ken Eckersley, the owner/winemaker, said “its always nice to be appreciated for all the hard work that goes into making quality wine. This was a great result for a small winery in a relatively unknown wine region and opens the door into the exclusive restaurant trade in Britain. I’m always telling people that Gippsland produce is World Class. We do rely on outsiders to remind us.
This represents a turn-around for the British, who have seen Australian wine as cheap and inelegant.”
]]>Read more here.
]]>The subject was ... What is a “Food and Wine Culture”?
]]>“Rudder and Fin” restaurant in Lakes Entrance on 21/11/15
Address by Ken Eckersley of Nicholson River Winery
It is something we often talk about at FOED and aspire to, but what is it really? Aren’t we doing that now just by eating local food?
I think the answer is No. It’s much more.
Maybe it is a European thing, but certainly the model is entrenched in French society, for example. Their passion and lifestyle for beautiful things and taking pleasure in food and wine every day, is worthy of a closer look.
What we can learn I can best sum up with the acronym AESE :
A is for Attitude: Caring about what you put in your mouth, seeking fresh foods from the producer’s market, and looking forward to the experience. Plan and match[1] the meal, wines and context[2].
E is for Experience: Food and wine are meant to be enjoyed; understanding and having a concept of quality[3] is paramount. Be informed, read the wine label!
S is for Sharing: Discuss, exchange opinions with your companions, evaluate, and compare experiences. It starts at the family dinner table.
E is for Etiquette: Appreciate and be thankful to the many people involved, and whose work and skills have brought such fine fare to your table.
Tonight, at the end of each course, I will be asking for volunteers to talk about their experience. They will receive a bottle of wine for their courage!
[1] ‘Match’– as in pairing, being compatible. One can cause the other to almost disappear, or, preferably, they can enhance each other.
[2] ‘Context’– refers to who you are with, the location and the occasion. They all influence the appropriate food and wine choices.
[3] ‘Quality’– is about persistence of flavour, as opposed to “short”, where there is an initial impression and then nothing! Wine is best eaten like food. People who “drink” wine miss a lot of what wine has to offer.
]]>The following is a list of exercises that will enable the reader to make the transition and benefit more from their wine experience.
Take a bottle of dry white or red wine, a small and a large wine glass, a tumbler of water, a spittoon and even some plain water biscuits.
]]>The following is a list of exercises that will enable the reader to make the transition and benefit more from their wine experience.
Take a bottle of dry white or red wine, a small and a large wine glass, a tumbler of water, a spittoon and even some plain water biscuits.
Exercise #1
Pour some wine into a wine glass and taste- don’t drink! Use the spittoon.
Rinse mouth with water. Taste wine again.
Different? Probably.
Moral: The first taste of a wine is unreliable and misleading. The mouth can be influenced for hours by what we have eaten and drunk previously, especially sweet things. The second taste is better.
Exercise #2
Pour some wine into the two different shaped glasses. Swirl gently and sniff each.
Different? Probably.
Moral: The shape of a wine glass influences the perception of wine aroma.
Exercise #3
Now taste the wines from Exercise #2, rinsing your mouth with water between tastes.
Different? Probably. The wine in the larger glass seems to taste fuller and more flavoursome.
Why? The larger glass is more likely to deliver to the front of the mouth.
Take the smaller glass and consciously pour some wine at the front of the mouth, keeping your head level.
Is the experience similar to that from the larger glass? Probably.
Moral: As long as you deposit the wine at the front of the mouth, then glass shape doesn’t affect your oral experience of a wine.
Exercise #4
An extension of Exercise #3.
Taste the wine as you would normally. Rinse your mouth with water.
Taste the wine a second time, but this time, make sure it is delivered to the front of the mouth and chew gently, like a portion of food. Do not swallow or hold your breath! Wait.
Different? If not then you are drinking well.
For most people there is a difference, as they think they should drink a drink.
Moral: To enjoy wine it is better to “eat” than to drink it!
Exercise #5
Taste the wine and hold your breath for about 10 seconds. What do you experience?
Breathe out. What do you experience now?
Different? If you do not have a cold or damaged nose then they are different types of experience.
The first is the mouthfeel or structure of a wine e.g. dry, acid, sweet, heavy, cold, tannin etc.
(The perception of balance is an interpretation of these in the cerebral cortex).
The second is the aroma in the mouth or “bacaroma” of a wine e.g. fruity, oaky, spicy, melon, cherry etc. (No, these are not fruits added to the wine, just part of the miracle of grapes that it can express the aromas of its cousin fruits.)
Moral and Explanation: Three senses are involved in the wine experience. Visual, nasal and oral; but when the wine enters the mouth the oral and nasal (for the second time) compete for your attention. The mouthfeel is continuous and slowly fades. The second aroma (or bacaroma) is harmonised with your breathing. It is there as you breathe out, but not when you breathe in; when only the mouthfeel will be apparent.
The word ‘flavour’ derives from ‘savour’ (old French) and means the total oral experience, combining mouthfeel and bacaroma. It is what lingers. I prefer to use “bacaroma” for the aroma that derives from the mouth as it is coming back over the nasal sensors. The aroma from the glass is coming in from the front of the nose i.e. the wine experience has two attempts to discern aroma, front and back. Sometimes they are similar, but they can be different.
Optional (advanced)
If the first five exercises were beneficial and you feel confident, then by all means proceed to the last four. More preparation will be required.
Exercise #6
Purchase a $10-15 wine and a $30-35 one of the same grape variety e.g. Chardonnay, Shiraz etc. or style e.g. Mornington, Yarra Valley, Coonawarra, Margaret River etc. You want to compare the same variety though grown in different places.
Ask your partner to pour them into two wine glasses of the same type, such that you do not know what is in each. This is a “blind” tasting– a practice unknown to wine journalists, but standard in Wine Shows.
As you have learnt, eat the wines, rinsing your mouth between tastes. If these are the first wines of the day, don’t forget to taste the first wine twice, to prepare the mouth.
Which wine gives more? Is it balanced? Does it have lingering flavours? A sure sign of an ordinary wine is that it is ‘short’ in flavour. Bacaroma is the better guide to quality than mouthfeel – the latter tells you more about the wine’s longevity. Many people believe that a ‘heavy’ wine is quality, but a good wine gives more of everything. Only low-cropped quality grapes will give lingering flavours. This blind exercise is wonderful to check expensive well-known labels. Prepare to be surprised.
Moral: Congratulations! You can now discern quality in wine.
Exercise #7
a) Purchase two bottles of a dry white wine. Leave one in the fridge (4°C) for a day and the other just an hour before the tasting, so it is about 10°C.
Taste each in a generous glass. Which gives more? If you prefer the colder wine then go back to Exercise #1!
b) A dry red wine is to be tasted at three temperatures: 15°C, 20°C and 25°C.
Take a dry red from the cellar (15°C). Pour a small portion into a generous glass.
Put cork back in and give 25 seconds in a microwave oven (lay bottle on side). Pour into glass. Repeat, and another put the bottle back in microwave for another 25 seconds. Pour into a glass.
Now taste all three. How are they different?
The first will be more tannic and ‘closed’, the warm one softer and thinner but spirituous, and the 20°C one should be just right! Like Goldilocks and the three bears, except she liked the smallest one.
Explanation:
As wine is a mixture of aromas, acids, bitterness and sweetness (the alcohol) temperature is important. Australian red wine is designed to be drunk around 20°C . French wines and Pinot Noir are okay at 15°C because they have less or different tannins. Coolness brings up the texture in these wines.
Dry whites needs to be cool to give a sense of freshness, but too cold (i.e. fridge temperature 4°C) only numbs them.
However, sparkling and sweet wines do need to be served cold.
Exercise #8: The hazards of the “tasting sequence”.
Let’s simulate a typical cellar door experience where one wine quickly follows another.
· Take two dry whites (e.g. a Sauvignon Blanc and a Chardonnay) or even one dry and a sweet white.
– Taste one, then the other, without water between them,
– Then wash out your mouth,
– Reverse the order and taste again.
Different? Note how they “overlap”; how one can interfere with the other, even making it unpleasant.
· Now, take two red wines such as a warm climate Shiraz or Cabernet (e.g. Barossa, McLaren Vale) and a mild climate Pinot Noir (e.g. Mornington, Yarra Valley). Repeat as above.
Different? Note how the larger bodied (or mouthfeel) wine makes the lighter bodied wine appear “thinner”, but there is little carryover when the lighter wine is tasted first.
Moral: Unless wines are similar, a frequent rinse of the mouth with water is a good idea.
Comment:
a) The British Masters of Wine believe that by tasting a mouthful of wine they can overcome the effects of the tasting sequence and confidently pass from red to white to sweet to red, etc. My experience is that this belief is not well founded.
b) If you have ever wondered why high alcohol/tannin reds do well in Wine Shows then this is a factor. Lesser bodied but more flavoursome wines appear “thin” alongside their “fat” companions.
Exercise #9 : Decanting and old wines.
Many people believe that old wines need to be decanted.
Find a 10+-year-old wine, probably a red. Pull out the cork, carefully– corks can disintegrate. Bottle variation is caused by cork variation. Pour gently into a glass and taste immediately, and then taste every 5 minutes for half an hour. Follow the changes in aroma/bacaroma and mouthfeel.
What do you notice?
Look for the gradual disappearance of the fruity type aromas and the shift in mouthfeel from perhaps a hardness to become softer, though a wine that remains hard is regarded as being “over the hill”.
Explanation: Normally the preservative (sulphur dioxide) protects the wine from change but this has usually all gone within 4-5 years after bottling. Thereafter the sealed bottle develops in the absence of oxygen a range of bouquets/aromas etc.
Upon exposure to air these unstable compounds quickly take up oxygen and effectively disappear. Some aromas are very stable, such as oak and “toastiness” and they remain. The change in mouthfeel is also an oxidation. Wines are very complex!
Moral: Decanting can kill aroma/bacaroma but soften the mouthfeel. A good use for decanting is for young wines, in order to reduce the preservative levels.
Ken Eckersley
Winemaker & Viticulturist
Nicholson River Winery
nrw@nicholsonriverwinery.com.au
www.nicholsonriverwinery.com.au
+61-3-5156 8241
October 2009 (updated June 2012)
]]>When Brian Croser became president of the Winemaker’s Federation of Australia and also Chief Judge of the Adelaide Wine Show during the 1990’s, he commented that ‘exhibits are increasingly cloned to meet … style preferences of the judges’. He went on to state that ‘the broad objective … should be to create the opportunity of a greater diversity of style representation’ for the wine entries in the shows.
]]>When Brian Croser became president of the Winemaker’s Federation of Australia and also Chief Judge of the Adelaide Wine Show during the 1990’s, he commented that ‘exhibits are increasingly cloned to meet … style preferences of the judges’. He went on to state that ‘the broad objective … should be to create the opportunity of a greater diversity of style representation’ for the wine entries in the shows.
Now, many years later, it seems that the ideals expressed by Croser have still not been achieved in our show system. This is probably due to the fact that the judges are merely human. Wine judges, as with all of us, prefer particular wine styles and these evolve over time. As the wine writer James Halliday says, commenting on Croser’s sentiments, ‘it is reasonable to suggest that when (show judges) come across a successful example of that style, it flies in the face of all reason to suggest that they will not give it high points, perhaps a gold medal’.
One of the problems is that some show judges like to believe that they are somehow judging against some mythical, absolute standard, rather than according to their own style preferences. At a ‘meet the judges’ workshop after a recent wine show, I raised this question of style with the judges, but they claimed that they were in fact judging absolute quality. In the early days of the revival of the Australian wine industry, there appeared to be many wines showing faults and a major role of wine show judges would be sorting out the quality wines from the faulty wines. But the wines of today are generally fault free so the judges are left to contend with style as a means of sorting out the medal winners.
It would be a healthy change if wine show judges kept the style and quality issue firmly in their minds during their judging in order to be less likely to confuse the issue. James Halliday, in his article, makes the point that show judges now often include members from abroad, who he says, ‘certainly introduce a breath of fresh air, but if their views are listened to, some rank outsiders among the wine entries get up to finish first’. His tone seems to suggest that this is not a desirable situation. It is also probably not likely because the Chairman of Judges generally has the final say as regards some of the more important awards.
The awarding of medals to wines that conform to a preferred style is an issue which is annoying to those winemakers whose style of wine may not conform to the fashion in vogue. I attended a seminar recently where the object was to demonstrate, through a series of tastings of a range of chardonnay wines, the style that wine makers today should be conforming to. The reason suggested to the participants was to make a chardonnay which was much leaner and more acid driven so as to compete favourably with sauvignon blanc wines which happened to be the current fashionable white wine.
The leader of that seminar is now the Chairman of Judges at a current major wine show. The style of chardonnay he preferred was enhanced if it also showed a ‘struck match’ character. This style also typically had no malo-lactic fermentation and showed the tightness of structure that comes with maturation in new oak. At Narkoojee our chardonnay style has typically shown the generous but softer mouthfeel that results from a portion of malo-lactic fermentation, with a richness coming from riper fruit and lower acidity.
Any sulphide character (normally referred to as ‘rotten egg gas’ or ‘burnt rubber’) was regarded as a fault and if detected in our wines, would be copper-fined out as a matter of course. It seems that this character is now known by the term of endearment as ‘struck match’ which, in the modern chardonnay style, is seen as a virtue. This character is likely to be much more obvious in wines under screw cap rather than under cork closures because of the anaerobic environment in the bottle. So with the modern style virtue is made from necessity.
All this can be quite frustrating for the winemaker. Should the winery continue with its traditional style at the risk of losing customers, or should it try to conform to the current ‘show’ style with a greater chance of winning an award? If the winemaker only partly embraces the new style, the wine runs the risk of being in a half-way land where it may be seen as neutral and without character. In any case it becomes a frustrating race if the temptation of trying to predict and keep up with the latest wine fashions, is followed.
I remember a Gippsland winery which, many years ago, won the admiration of the wine press with a big, buttery, rich chardonnay style which was scored 98 points out of 100, by one highly regarded wine writer – a rare score indeed. Today it is highly likely that this same wine would be pushed aside in a show line-up with not even a bronze medal to show.
One hears of wineries which employ a special task force whose job it is to prepare wines specifically for a particular wine show, knowing the style preferences of the Chaiman of Judges. On the other hand there are winemakers who continue with their traditional styles and who find show results irrelevant, never entering any wines into a show. Unfortunately this in turn tends to discredit the show system which, as Croser pointed out those many years ago, requires ‘a more consumer oriented judging fraternity operating in a more public environment’, but it appears to me that this ideal is yet to be reached and show results are relegated to a backwater, a quaint phenomenon to be wondered at by the rest of us.
All this makes it easy to agree with the highly regarded British wine writer, Andrew Jefford, who writes a regular column in Decanter magazine and who once stated that he believed it was not possible to judge a wine by allocating a numerical score because of the basic subjectivity of such an exercise.
Ken Eckersley
November 2011
]]>Secondly, it is important to know how your eating system works.
There are two competing senses involved – the mouth/tongue and the nose.
]]>Secondly, it is important to know how your eating system works.
There are two competing senses involved – the mouth/tongue and the nose. The former tastes or feels (sweet, acid, bitter, salt, savoury) what has entered the mouth while the latter checks out the aromas – twice – by sniffing, and then while the food or drink is warming in the mouth. This second time is interesting because the aromas are passing over the nasal sensors in the reverse direction, carried there as we breathe out (bacaroma). The word flavour refers to the persistent feeling in the mouth combined with the bacaroma. Thirdly, wine is not like other beverages. If you drink wine in the same way as water or beer, as many do, then you are missing much that a wine has to offer, in particular the flavours and a more complete experience of the wine’s balance. On the other hand if you treat wine as a food (liquid food?) and eat it, then everything that a wine can offer becomes available. Here’s how it’s done: Keep the head level (don’t throw the chin up!), tip a small portion of wine into the front of the mouth, don’t swallow, hold the wine there and chew lightly. Wait and enjoy the experience. Now that you are equipped with the above knowledge any wine can be approached with confidence. That doesn’t mean that you have to like everything you taste, but you can make better judgements. For example, it is much easier to spot the ‘short (ie. cheap) wines as opposed to those with lingering flavours (ie. quality). Wine is no different to other foods like strawberries or tomatoes; the mass produced cheap ones will be short and watery whereas the quality ones linger and are memorable. Foods that are delicious and interesting need care and expense to produce. Here are some other useful hints:
Ken Eckersley
Nicholson River Winery
January 2011 (updated October 2018)
nrw@nicholsonriverwinery.com.au
[For more information see these other articles “How to Eat Wine” and “New Modern Wine Course”.]
Image: Anita Foard
]]>Hence there are two almost concurrent sensory experiences but people appear to talk and write as if it is one.
]]>This is quite right, and it could also have said “Smell the taste of Munchies”, because taste, whether food or wine, has these two sensory aspects.
This will come as a surprise to most people, although on reflection it will appear obvious.
Even wine professionals use the word “palate” for taste and mistakenly interpret that to mean only its mouthfeel, whilst contrariwise foodies have a habit of regarding anything that goes into the mouth as having “flavour”. Each is half right.
Taking wine as an example, we appreciate the aroma in the glass and then we place it in the mouth where the water soluble part (extract) interacts with the lining to give varying impressions of sweetness, acidity, bitterness, warmth etc. and the volatile part wafts away and is drawn up as you breathe out, past the nasal sensors.
Hence there are two almost concurrent sensory experiences but people appear to talk and write as if it is one.
The mouthfeel balance or “Suppleness Index” (Peynaud; “Knowing and Making Wine”, p15ff) is well known. It is the perception of sweetness (alcohol plus sugar) against sourness (acids) plus bitterness (tannins).
But what of the balance between mouthfeel and flavour? If we can reexamine that simple act of tasting a glass of wine, frame by frame as it were, light could be shed on the relationship between mouthfeel and flavour and how we have misunderstood them. When a wine is sniffed in the glass one can concentrate on just this sensory experience. Whereas in the mouth there is competition for our conscious attention between the palate and nasal experiences. Wine is a mixture and when it hits the tongue etc., the sensors send their messages to the cortex to be organised and interpreted. In particular the awareness of balance. This introduces the First Principle of the Senses – “first in, best dressed”, or, where the wine first touches in the mouth wins the race. So, a wine will feel softer if it first touches the front rather than the middle of the tongue. As well the front of the tongue, used to being primed by food, can send a message to the nasal sense to get ready. Hence the best way to experience the palate of a wine is to place it at the front of the mouth. The flavour journey is different and takes a few seconds longer (hence the expression “mid palate flavours” ie. the flavour arrives after the mouthfeel in the cortex). In the 37 degree environment the volatiles move out of the wine to the back off the mouth where they are sucked up through the nasal passage in the breathe out part of the cycle (nothing is perceived when breathing in – thus the perception of flavour actually pulses). (See WIJ Nov-Dec 04 p11) The data from the nasal sensors goes to the fore brain (olfactory lobe) specialising in detecting and processing smells, where there can be words, likes/dislikes and memories attached. THEN it sends a message to the cortex for integration with the already arrived mouthfeel signals.
Our consciousness is easily overloaded; try reading a book as you listen to the radio or having a conversation while watching TV.
There can be individual variations; as we age the ability to ‘focus’ with our senses diminishes and women have a better ability to ‘multitask’ (ie concentrate on more than one thing at a time.) So here we have two sources of sensory data competing for your awareness; mouthfeel gets there first, and suppose it is particularly strong? It is reasonable to assume that beyond a certain point flavour will not be noticed in heavy mouthfeel wines. ie. imbalance. The expression “fruit driven” thus refers to wines with strong aromas and little mouthfeel or afterflavour, as in many NZ sauvignon blancs. Also an example of imbalance.
A balance between flavour and mouthfeel would have BOTH being perceived, and a long afterflavour and afterfeeling being the indicators of quality.
I have noticed how heavy bodied wines in barrel have an amazing ability to ‘absorb’ new oak flavours. Consider too the aroma in the glass and how it seems to ‘disappear’ on the palate with big wines, despite the 15-20 degree temperature increase in the mouth that you would expect to enhance volatiles.
It is understandable that the 3-7-10 Show system in practice has awarded the 10 to mouthfeel, despite this not being the intention of the originators, and is out of step with how our sensory system deals with wine. (WIJ May-June 06 p75ff)
What then are the enologist’s and viticulturist’s contributions? Simply, the enologist’s responsibility is to create a balanced structure without losing the fruit flavours, and perhaps enhancing them with oak and yeasts. The viticulturist delivers the quality fruit that determines, in the main, the flavours. ie. the real quality. So, it is possible to say “This is a well made wine, but it is not a good wine”. ie. the wine is balanced and has structure, but it lacks flavour. Our Industry needs diversity and new directions. Understanding the role of aroma/flavour is a way forward to both improve the enjoyment, and to give more options in the making of wine, for a new generation of wine drinkers. Ken Eckersley Enologist Nicholson River Winery March 2007 References:
Clarke, R. and Bakker, J. (2004) Wine Flavour Chemistry. Blackwell
Eckersley, K. (2004) Wine Industry Journal vol 19 no.6
“Wine for Everyman”
Eckersley, K. (2006) Wine Industry Journal vol 21 no. 3
“Wine Shows 3-7-10 Bingo!”
LaMar, J. (2006) “Tasting Wine- A sensory users manual”
Peynaud, Emile (1987) The Taste of Wine. Macdonald,Orbis
Image credit: Anita Foard
]]>