On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, Martin wrote:

The Germans help their wine by adding sugar in a wet year.

All wine makers do. In France it is called chaptalisation.

I thought in some countries including Germany the use of sugar in
anything except plonk is banned?

No. The law in France, and I suspect in other countries too, is that, in
a bad year, winemakers are allowed to add just enough sugar to bring the
sugar level up to what it would normally be, so that the alcohol content
as defined in the Appellation can remain the same.

Not with German Qualitätswein mit Prädikat wine

Mmmm, we were talking generally and now we are talking specifically!
Yes, of course there are certain types of wine where the addition of
sugar is not allowed, particularly those produced with the aid of the
pourriture noble. But if we are talking about a straightforward dry
white wine then it is permissible to add enough sugar to bring the sugar
content up to what it would be in a normal year. What that will be
varies, of course, according to the region. Therefore a Rhine white is
never going to be as alcoholic as a Burgundy white. But, as I said, if
sugar has to be added then that won't make the wine any better and the
year will go down in the annals as a poor year.

Neither was I talking about artificial ways of making a sweet wine. That
does go on even though it's not legal. Do you remember the Austrian wine
scandal of twenty years ago where a combine just outside Rust (on the
Neusiedler See) was adding antifreeze to produce a sweet wine from the
poor grapes that the producers didn't know what to do with. It took
Austrian wine off the British shelves for years and wasn't justified
because the reputable wine was produced properly - and is good.

Anyhow, I've looked at the pages that you've given the URL for. What
strikes me is that the many spelling mistakes suggest that they don't
come from an authoritative source but from an enthusiastic amateur -
like me!

But to pick up on one point that you quoted:

The lowest qualities, Landwein and Tafelwein are
normally best avoided.

I don't know about Germany but certainly in France there are some wines
that don't have an AOC simply because the grapes are grown outside the
AOC area, sometimes by only a few yards. In other cases there is
over-production and the viticulteur is allowed to make only a certain
number of litres of the AOC wine. The rest has to be sold as Vin de
Table. Thus it is worth while hunting around in France for a Vin de
Table that is made from the same ingredients as an AOC, is far, far
cheaper, and is just as good. I discovered a non-Chablis like this a few
years ago. But I can't remember what the Vin de Table name was! I wish I
could find that vineyard again!

Something else also makes me a little suspicious about the pages that
you quote. I do feel that he/she is voicing his/her own opinion a lot of
the time. For instance, Müller-Thurgau is, or was some years ago,
regarded as quite a high quality grape but yet he has written this:

Müller Thurgau Latest genetic research has shown this to be a cross of
Riesling and Gutedel, not of Riesling and Silvaner as formerly
believed.
Whatever it origins though, it remains one of the vices of the German
wine industry: early ripening, high yielding, and planted all over the
place since the 60's, it produces tanker loads of rubbish, rarely
rising to
the dizzy heights of mediocrity.

I used to grow Müller-Thurgau myself but it was never an early ripening
grape which is why I got rid of it (also it is highly susceptible to the
various mildews). I've now replaced it with Kerner which is another
Riesling cross. MT was never a high-yielding grape in my experience, but
when I was able to find a German or an Austrian MT wine it was superb. I
kept one for over ten years and it mellowed beautifully.

David

--
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet: | writing from |
| Fidonet: David Rance 2:252/110 | Caversham, |
| BBS: telnet://mesnil.demon.co.uk | Reading, UK |
+-------------------------------------------------------+