Home
|
Subscription
RSS
Contact
Newsletter
Search
German| Date: 2005-11-19 07:24:57 |
| From: BLVDDAD@aol.com |
Subject: Re: GERMAN CLASSIFICATION - PUZZLE!! |
| Dear Jochen, While reading this material it become s apparent how much deep and intractable confusion i s built into it simply because of overlapping jurisdi ctions: the Lander laws, and Federal law, and the V DP regulations which have stature as a sort of 'priva te' law in Germany (I think this would be like civil law in the United States.) This is apparently the c ause of the confusion with bottles in some regions be aring the notation "Qualitätswein mit Prädikat" and in some regions just 'Qualitätswein', even if they are legally Spätlese wines (Rheingau, Pfalz, Rhein hessen, and Nahe). Even so, in regions beside the Mos el the intention is apparently to focus on the Spät lese-level wines (although even here the association can require must weights in excess of the legal limi ts). The fact that the German viticulturists chose to go at these changes piecemeal has resulted in a situation that I thought could never happen: there is now much WORSE confusion concerning German wine than there existed after the 1971 regulations. The VDP is very blithe about this: they say that these wine s are aimed at the connoisseur and the connoisseur wil l be able to make the effort to understand them. We ll, I've been passionately buying, following and wr iting about German wine for over 30 years and I'm con fused. If I'm not a connoisseur who are these wines being marketed for? The ingenuous assertion that sw eet wines don't need the kind of protection provided by these new regulations is a complete logical contr adiction. If terroir, yield restrictions, selection of fruit, and site specificity is important for dry wines, why is it no longer of concern for wines of su pposedly higher quality? I can testify that debased sweet-style Auslesen have done considerable harm to the reputation of German wine in this country. If an ything, these additional quality guarantees are MORE important for sweet wines as for the dry. The idea that an Auslese is simply a wine over a certain minim al must weight is ludicrous on the face of it If the Federal system in Germany doesn't revise these law s to make them consistent in content and intent I ca n foresee only more serious trouble, and even ruin, ahead for the German estate-wines industry. My under standing is that the Grosses Gewächs category (Rheing au) is now enshrined in law, even though originally this category was the result of work by the VDP (Rhe ingau) by regulation rather than law. As to the quot ation by Herr Hasselbach: It's difficult for me to i nterpret the statement you quote outside its context , nor do I know when it was made. Hasselbach may have been disturbed by the possibility that Chapitalizat ion might occur without its being legal or in accord ance with regulations, as I see it. This would be in the context of the differing labeling regulations th at pertain to the Rheinhesse, which as I understand it call for the use of the term 'Qualitätswein' Erst e Gewächs.(tout court). My conclusion is based on this thought: The use of the term 'Spätlese' is mo re than just a harvest must weight, but it refers to t he legal use of the term with its implication that C hapitalization has not been performed. It's an enolo gic characteristic, as specified in law, and not just a viticultural or harvest characteristic. . If the GG/EG wines had been Chapitalized, of course, such usage would have been strictly illegal, and growers before this have found themselves in prison for pre cisely this misuse, as I'm sure you are aware. Howev er, I'll readily admit the possibility that I've compl etely misinterpreted these treacherous waters! Bes t, John Trombley In a message dated 11/18/2005 2:45: 15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jochen.mueller@clever -mail.net writes: John, my assumption that "Großes Gewächs" or "Erstes Gewächs" can be chaptalized is based e.g., on statements of Mario Scheuermann and Fr itz Hasselbach, found (or referred to) here: http:// www.talk-about-wine.de/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=863 "Auch stört sich Fritz Hasselbach an der Möglichkeit, dass die Ersten Gewächse chapatalisiert werden dürfen u nd dass die Güter nicht mehr zunächst mindestens fà ¼nf Jahrgänge die "Grand Cru"-Fähigkeit einer klassi fizierten Lage unter Beweis stellen müssen, ehe sie die Bezeichnugn übernehmen dürfen." (Mario Scheuerm ann) "Das wirklich "teuflische" an diesen Regelungen für Erste, Grosse oder Sonstwasfür Gewächse ist do ch das, dass ein Teil des VDP danach strebt trockene Spätlesen mit einem anderen Namen und als Qualitäts wein zu vermarkten mit der Möglichkeit der Chaptalis ation." (Mario Scheuermann) I understand the VdP crit erion you cited as Spätlese must weight and late pic king, but obviously chaptalization is not forbidden. > I'm interested in finding specific regulations for the Mosel (in > German or English), which is appare ntly neglected on the Verband site. > Do you have a citation to them? For the moment the best I found is: "An Mosel-Saar-Ruwer wird der Begriff „Erste Lage “ für die Spitzenkategorie verwendet. Dieser verde utlicht, dass das Klassifikationsmodell den spezielle n Terroir-Gegebenheiten an Mosel, Saar und Ruwer angep asst wurde und den taditionellen Weinstil der Region berücksichtigt. Das Modell „Erste Lage“ legt kla re Geschmacksdefinitionen für die einzelnen Prädikat e fest: „Erste Lage“ Weine umfassen gehaltvolle, trockene Qualitätsweine, subtile, leichte Kabinette, fruchtige, elegante Spätlesen und komplexe, edelsüà Ÿe Auslesen. So kann sich ein Weinberg je nach Jahrga ng, Besonderheiten in der Bodenstruktur und kulturell em Erbe in verschiedenen Geschmacksbidern optimal prà ¤sentieren." This can indeed be found on www.grosses gewaechs.com; go to "Die Klassifikation", then to "Fra gen und Antworten", no. 4. Best, Jochen -----Origin al Message----- From: BLVDDAD@aol.com To: wineforum@w ein-plus.com Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:27:43 EST Subj ect: [wineforum] Re: GERMAN CLASSIFICATION - PUZZLE!! > > Jochen, > > Indeed this is somewhat confusing. However, Grosses gewächs wine is > required by regu lation to be at least Spätlese in quality. Here is a > citation: > > > 4. Oenologische Werte > Das Lese gut für Grosse Gewächse muss zumindest Spätlesequ alität haben. > > (from the German VDP website) > S o there should NEVER be any chapitalization in a GG wine. > I'm interested in finding specific regulations for the Mosel (in > German or > English), which is apparently neglected on the Verband site. Do you > have a > citation to them? > Best, John Trombley > > > In a message dated 11/17/2005 10:07:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > jochen.mueller@clever-mail.net writ es: > > A "Großes Gewächs" is NOT a QmP; the expre ssion is not covered by > German > wine law (but is s omething as a brand of a growers' business > associat ion, > the VdP); as far as I know these wines can inde ed be chaptalized > More infos: www.wein-p lus.com Unsubscribe: www.wein-plus.com/abmelden .htm More infos: www.wein-plus.com Unsubscribe: www.wein-plus.com/abmelden.htm |
|
 |
|
|
by Raymond