Bill Nanson - The Burgundy Report

"I think I was possibly the first to publicly raise & discuss the 'vintage character' of 2004 reds. Early on I had empirically estimated that about 30% of cuvées had a strange aromatic profile, elevated levels of which also affected the taste. I accepted to a large but limited extent to (lets call it for now . . . .) the 'taint' and one which would hopefully subside, but in Oct 2008 lunch with a few fellow enthusiasts that focused on 2004's left me questioning that perspective.



It was only by chance that I mentioned my experience of grape-baskets often with dozens of ladybirds (ladybugs or coccinella depending on your location) at harvest-time, but quick as a flash, Don Cornwall found a potential link - pyrazines.



But first let us take a step back. As the wines matured in their barrels, the 2004 reds were better than many had expected. The wines showed ripe fruit coupled to a nice freshness. At en-primeur tastings all was fine & for the first 2-3 months in bottle they repaid my confidence, but less than 6 months after bottling there was an obvious 'odour' problem.



The 'character' of the vintage

The closest for me was a peculiarly old English thing - the smell of Wrights Coal Tar soap - an almost mineral, chemical smell - I would describe it as similar to a cedar / sandalwood mix. Others say 'mirepoix' or vey simply 'green', which implies under-ripe - but 2004's were far from under-ripe. In fact, in my opinion, 'green' does not describe very well the character of 2004's.



Who is affected?

Close to everyone. Bottles opened by me between Sept 2006 & Jun 2007 indicated about a 30% level of 'infection'. A more recent but small sampling, had a majority showing the effect. The issue was that in the early months after bottling, the producer was not an indicator - find two cuvees whose elevage were side by side & in many cases only one wine would show taint. You could find it on a low level in DRC wines, but here's the interesting thing: at many low levels, its just another small note of complexity & its actually rather nice - e.g. Fourrier's Morey Clos Salon tasted in Oct - increase the concentration & its nasty. A much bigger concern to me is that some bottles I opened 2 years ago, bottles that were fine, now show an 'issue', so the 'infection rate' certainly hasn't peaked yet.



What is it?

Well chemically, a number of more technically oriented wine-makers have told me that the smell is of pyrazines. If so, thaty doesn't bode well for a slow reduction over time - pyrazine odours can often get worse with time. Ladybirds (coccinella) use pyrazines (methoxy-pyrazines) as sexual attractants. They are also used as a defence alert - pick one up & the yellow colour that leach onto your fingers also contains pyrazines.



How did it get there?

The link could be these coccinella. Some people pooh-pooh the idea - 'you expect me to believe that every vineyard was infested with these things'? Actually NO, though it can happen. The vineyard is in many respects a red herring: 2004 was a year with an over-abundance of coccinella. The following year the cuveries were full of fruit-flies. The year after that the grapes were full of earwigs.. In 2008 the grapes were almost fauna-free as they were so cold. There are natural cycles & some insects dominate for a year & are seen less the following year. Its not about how many coccinella were in the vineyard, its about how many were in the cap of the fermenters or on the triage (sorting) table. That coccinella can taint a wine has been empirically demonstrated by a number of authorities.

Of course, there is another possibility - Coccinella are not involved in the 2004 'vintage character' at all!



Summary

I've 'hypothesised' coccinella as a plausible reason for the malaise that affects so many 2004 reds. Many winemakers accept that possibility whilst others remain unsure. I fully accept that coccinella may not be THE reason - but thus far no-one can tell you otherwise & there is certainly no alternate & 'viable' theory yet proposed. I expect that no wineries will be sponsoring research to find a 'root-cause' as they have to concentrate on selling recent vintages.

Other than to 'keep my hand in' I have all but stopped opening 2004's as I dont like the 'taint', whatever its source. So the vast majority of my bottles will stay in cellar a good few more years to see whether MP's (methoxy-pyrazines) really do diminish with time - and thats a shame as the vintage had much early charm.

So what isn't it?

1. Its not a smell of rot

2. It is not the smell of stems

3. It is not anything to do with unripe fruit (few winemakers added sugar in this vintage because the natural sugars were high enough. It is a rare wine the truly unripe 2004)



So it is a conundrum for two reasons:

1. Wines tasted from barrel showed this only to a minor, let us say 'normal' extent; yet it has developed / amplified since bottling

2. Different wines from the same cellar (so same viticulture, ripeness & vinification) are not the same. Some show it & others dont!"



Confused?