Old vines or not old vines, that is the question...

[Andy Velebil]

Note from Admin: This discussion originated here and was split off into a separate thread at the request of djewesbury.

-....particularly when you consider that the proportion of those Romaneira vines old enough to be producing VP quality grapes in 2011 was presumably much smaller (only 36 hectares of vineyard in 2004, for instance)

I'm going to take aim at this one widely held incorrect "fact." Vines do not need to be old to make great wines. That is a myth which has perpetuated for many reasons, marketing being just one.

[RAYC]

-....particularly when you consider that the proportion of those Romaneira vines old enough to be producing VP quality grapes in 2011 was presumably much smaller (only 36 hectares of vineyard in 2004, for instance)

I'm going to take aim at this one widely held incorrect "fact." Vines do not need to be old to make great wines. That is a myth which has perpetuated for many reasons, marketing being just one.

They do not necessarily need to be "old". But when Christian Seely himself has gone on record to debunk this myth, he has stated that in his opinion it takes about 8 years for the vines to be ready to produce VP. That's still older than the 40 hectares vines that would have been planted at Romaneira from 2005 onwards...

But in your opinion, rather than my recollection of Christian's opinion (which could be shaky), how old is old enough? 31 Noval aside...

I'll do a search for a link to the interview where he stated this and try to post later - i think it was from an article that was published around the time of the ownership re-shuffle at Romaneira last year.

[RAYC]

Apologies - it was not a direct quote from Christian Seely but Sarah Ahmed's reporting of her conversation with him:

Adamant that old vines do not necessarily the best wines make, Seely reckons that, after five years, grapes make the premium wine grade and, from 8 years onwards, are vintage port quality. [emphasis added]

[Glenn E.]

But in your opinion, rather than my recollection of Christian's opinion (which could be shaky), how old is old enough? 31 Noval aside...

That seems like a rather hefty aside. '31 Noval is singular proof that "young" vines can produce phenomenal Port.

Granted, it may take a lot of luck or a blender who knows how to work with grapes from young vines, but it's clearly possible.

So I suppose the real question is, "how old to younger vines have to be in order for a blender who's used to working with grapes from older vines to be able to make quality Port out of the grapes from younger vines?"

In other words, at what point do grape vines stop being "younger" vines?

[g-man]

But in your opinion, rather than my recollection of Christian's opinion (which could be shaky), how old is old enough? 31 Noval aside...

That seems like a rather hefty aside. '31 Noval is singular proof that "young" vines can produce phenomenal Port.

Granted, it may take a lot of luck or a blender who knows how to work with grapes from young vines, but it's clearly possible.

So I suppose the real question is, "how old to younger vines have to be in order for a blender who's used to working with grapes from older vines to be able to make quality Port out of the grapes from younger vines?"

In other words, at what point do grape vines stop being "younger" vines?

not a fair point, who knows what they really did in the 30's? It could have been mixed with baga.

Case in point the infamous 47' cheval blanc was very heavily adulterated where the proprietor added ice to the must to try to get it to ferment properly.

[Glenn E.]

But in your opinion, rather than my recollection of Christian's opinion (which could be shaky), how old is old enough? 31 Noval aside...

That seems like a rather hefty aside. '31 Noval is singular proof that "young" vines can produce phenomenal Port.

Granted, it may take a lot of luck or a blender who knows how to work with grapes from young vines, but it's clearly possible.

So I suppose the real question is, "how old to younger vines have to be in order for a blender who's used to working with grapes from older vines to be able to make quality Port out of the grapes from younger vines?"

In other words, at what point do grape vines stop being "younger" vines?

not a fair point, who knows what they really did in the 30's? It could have been mixed with baga.

Case in point the infamous 47' cheval blanc was very heavily adulterated where the proprietor added ice to the must to try to get it to ferment properly.

The point is that the grapes were planted in what, 1927? 4-yr old vines, whether "enhanced" or not, produced an epic Port.

[g-man]

Considering phyloxera in 1882 which meant vines were ripped and replanted for an 1884? harvest.

I'm pretty sure if you landed a bottle of 1887 Noval it would be incredible too.

if you ever get the chance

try some of Ridge's zinfandels

they have a huge variety, some vines are 80+ years some were replanted in the past 3-4 years. Same producer, same wine making team, they swear by the old vines for the minerality and the consistency.
it's an interesting taste test regardless.

[jdaw1]

Considering phyloxera in 1882 which meant vines were ripped and replanted for an 1884? harvest.

The old diseased vines continued to produce, though with yields much smaller than previously.

[g-man]

Considering phyloxera in 1882 which meant vines were ripped and replanted for an 1884? harvest.

The old diseased vines continued to produce, though with yields much smaller than previously.

you sure they didnt' rip them out and replant them with new plants?

[Glenn E.]

The entire vineyard was replanted in the 1920s, I just don't remember the exact year.

[griff]

For non-fortified wine production often the first and second crop off young vines can be superb. These crops are somewhat similar to a crop from old vines (I would have said 20 years plus would be classed as old but not sure in the Douro) as the vines are low vigour in the early years (years 3 to 4). It is the high vigour adolescent years that produces lower quality wine. Not sure if that holds true for vintage port production but I cannot see why it would differ.

[Andy Velebil]

But in your opinion, rather than my recollection of Christian's opinion (which could be shaky), how old is old enough? 31 Noval aside...

That seems like a rather hefty aside. '31 Noval is singular proof that "young" vines can produce phenomenal Port.

Granted, it may take a lot of luck or a blender who knows how to work with grapes from young vines, but it's clearly possible.

So I suppose the real question is, "how old to younger vines have to be in order for a blender who's used to working with grapes from older vines to be able to make quality Port out of the grapes from younger vines?"

In other words, at what point do grape vines stop being "younger" vines?

not a fair point, who knows what they really did in the 30's? It could have been mixed with baga.

Case in point the infamous 47' cheval blanc was very heavily adulterated where the proprietor added ice to the must to try to get it to ferment properly.

31 NN is an interesting thing. No one REALLY knows exactly what went on back then. Why? because any potential records were lost in the fire back in 80's. There is so much folk lore over this small plot of land it's incredible. Even Noval's own label used to incorrectly listed it as from "Pre-Phyloxeria" vines. Because they are ungrafted they are continually replacing them. Seely himself has said the vines don't last much longer than about 20-25 years as a result. So the overall age of the Nacional plot isn't what most would consider "Old Vines." Yet, ask almost anyone and they will tell you NN is from super old vines planted in the 20's. I'm not a math guy but that doesn't add up...as by now it's been 100% replanted at least once and probably twice by now (someone else can do the math for more exact #'s).

As for Cheval Blanc, adding ice was not unheard of back then. There wasn't the mechanical means to cool a tank or lager as there is today with cooling jackets, chilled tanks, etc. The of the few ways to cool a hot must so you didn't end up with a stuck fermentation was to add ice or pray the weather changed and got real cold quick.

[Andy Velebil]

Considering phyloxera in 1882 which meant vines were ripped and replanted for an 1884? harvest.

I'm pretty sure if you landed a bottle of 1887 Noval it would be incredible too.

if you ever get the chance

try some of Ridge's zinfandels

they have a huge variety, some vines are 80+ years some were replanted in the past 3-4 years. Same producer, same wine making team, they swear by the old vines for the minerality and the consistency.
it's an interesting taste test regardless.

Ridge we can talk about. A very good friend of mine, who've I've known since he was 6 years old, was the Monte Bello Vineyard manager at Ridge (now at Araujo). He'll tell you the same thing. Young vines can make some amazing wines. But there are issues with young vines that must be addressed to do so. You have to thin the vines a lot to keep berry production down as they are very vigorous when young. Winemakers/vineyard managers don't know how they behave in various weather conditions yet. Where old vines they've worked with for years and they can predict what they will do in almost any weather condition and take steps ahead of time to mitigate potential issues. And you have to keep a close eye on them, often daily, to see what changes they are going through. If you've got 200 hectares of young vines, or even 50, you aren't going to be able to spend the time needed with those young vines to make a great wine. So it's cheaper to simply leave them be until they get a little older, around the 5-7 year mark, and use the young grapes for lesser tier wines.

NN plot is a tiny plot. So it's very easy to give it any special attention it needs to enable it to make great wines.

[jdaw1]

31 NN is an interesting thing. No one REALLY knows exactly what went on back then. Why? because any potential records were lost in the fire back in 80's. There is so much folk lore over this small plot of land it's incredible. Even Noval's own label used to incorrectly listed it as from "Pre-Phyloxeria" vines. Because they are ungrafted they are continually replacing them. Seely himself has said the vines don't last much longer than about 20-25 years as a result. So the overall age of the Nacional plot isn't what most would consider "Old Vines." Yet, ask almost anyone and they will tell you NN is from super old vines planted in the 20's. I'm not a math guy but that doesn't add up...as by now it's been 100% replanted at least once and probably twice by now (someone else can do the math for more exact #'s).

NN doesn’t 100% replant. Vines are replaced one at a time, as needed. So young vines will pick up the flora and fauna of their neighbours: the bacteria and lichen and other things. So it is plausible that one-at-a-time replanting might have a quite different effect to a complete tear-it-up-and-start-again replanting.

[Andy Velebil]

NN doesn’t 100% replant. Vines are replaced one at a time, as needed. So young vines will pick up the flora and fauna of their neighbours: the bacteria and lichen and other things. So it is plausible that one-at-a-time replanting might have a quite different effect to a complete tear-it-up-and-start-again replanting.

No, vines don't pick the flora and fauna of their neighbors unless it happens to be some other non-vine bush/tree, such as Eucalyptus, Esteva, etc.

Yes, they are replanted one, two, or 5 at a time as they vines stop producing and/or die every year. But if the vines lasts only about 20-25 years, say 30 at the most, then please tell me how many times that vineyard has effectively been totally replanted since the late 20's? What I am saying is, you've only got a vine that is probably at best 30 years old. For the Douro, that isn't generally considered "old vines", where you're more into the 40-50+ year range before you hear of people calling them Old Vines. And it gives one pause that younger vines can't make great wines.

[jdaw1]

Simple model. Assume that living on or in the soil near (henceforth,‘on’) a vine are bacteria, fungi, and other small living things (henceforth, ‘things’). Some things tend to live on young vines, some tend to live on old.

If vines are gradually replaced, the things that were in the vineyard will continue to be there. They stay on old, are transferred to other vines as they grow old, which will later pass them back to the new adolescents that replaced the former very old. The things in the vineyard thereby remain of the same type.

But if an old vineyard is swept clean and 100% replanted, it will, from wind, gradually be populated anew with slightly different things, and as the vines age, with other old-preferring things. But these things will not necessarily be quite the same as were there before.

Which is why it might be that gradual replanting might keep more constant the character of a vineyard, relative to a clean sweep and 100% replant.

[Roy Hersh]

The Nacional vineyard was replanted in 1925 and the 1931 Nacional was made from six year old vines. Rute and others have mentioned the vines nowadays average 35 years of age.

[g-man]

The Nacional vineyard was replanted in 1925 and the 1931 Nacional was made from six year old vines. Rute and others have mentioned the vines nowadays average 35 years of age.

that flies in contradiction to what was stated previously from other posters though.

"Seely himself has said the vines don't last much longer than about 20-25 years as a result. "

how do you average 35 years of age with such statement?

[Glenn E.]

"Seely himself has said the vines don't last much longer than about 20-25 years as a result. "

how do you average 35 years of age with such statement?

I didn't write that, Andy did.

Different people giving different semi-generic answers. 35 isn't that much longer than 25.

[g-man]

"Seely himself has said the vines don't last much longer than about 20-25 years as a result. "

how do you average 35 years of age with such statement?

I didn't write that, Andy did.

Different people giving different semi-generic answers. 35 isn't that much longer than 25.

umm it's 10 years longer or 40% of 25 fairly significant rounding.

and corrected for Andy

[djewesbury]

Admins: these last threads should be in a separate thread, please - we have diverged from '2011 Declarations'.

[Andy Velebil]

So lets assume it's 35 years, instead of 25, before they need to be replaced. It was replanted (what is assumed 100%, but no one knows for sure beyond a reasonable doubt*) in or about 1925. 89 Years later, here we are. Wisdom says the whole plot, or at least a significant portion of it, has effectively been replanted now at least once or twice over. If the average vine only lasts 35 years that is barily considered "old vines" in the Douro meaning of it. And thus it isn't an "old vine" VP. Also proves you can make an awesome Port from younger vines.

This does make one stop and think about how mythical stories sometimes make for good marketing. That has no correlation to it still being an awesome Port in itself mind you.

*How many of us have been told by countless producers their relatives or ancestors were "the first" to do such and such in the Douro?

[Glenn E.]

Also proves you can make an awesome Port from younger vines.

What it implies is that to make the best Port, you need a mix of young and old(er) vines, at least if you believe that the Nacional vineyard makes the best Port.

[Glenn E.]

umm it's 10 years longer or 40% of 25 fairly significant rounding.

It's still just two different people giving "rough estimate" answers to a fairly generic question. Honestly, between Christian and Rute, I don't know who I think is more likely to know the correct answer. I doubt either one of them does much "hands on" vine tending.

But the point is neither number is a particularly old vine. Nacional is not a "vinha velha" Port. And the 1931 was made with 6-yr old vines, which I think most would consider to be young vines. Leaving Nacional, and the 1931 in particular, as counter-examples to the "older vines make better wines" rule of thumb.

[Roy Hersh]

I'll ignore g-man's comment, as I clearly stated where my info came from regardless if he thinks it flies in the face of other people's stated opinions here. Now more to the real point, Andy's assertion.

Since 2004, in articles I've had published (a full decade ago) I have been on record saying that old vines are not the be all, end all for the production of quality Ports. Sure the 1931 Nacional is a great example, but there are many others, all over the Douro. Replanted vines and vineyards abound as do new parcels started from scratch at famed quintas as well as brand new locations, especially up in the Douro Superior where vineyard land is still relatively easy to come by compared to prime expositions in the Cima Corgo. Andy and I see this from a similar point of view: that old vines and field blends can and do certainly put forth unique characteristics in Port wine, vintage in particular, but young vines can also deliver greatness as well.

But where we diverge is that when you have a "dead vineyard" such as after phylloxera and a full replanting is necessary, afterwards, you don't have to do full on total vineyard replantings as specific vines die off. Vines die at various ages and in the Nacional vineyard in particular, (I've visited 9x now) each time a vine dies it is replanted, one at a time or several at a time if the need is there. But that is way different than an entire parcel of 2.5 ha requiring a 100% makeover. Adding vines on an as needed basis allows the character of the Nacional vineyard to continue to show very similar characters with the x factor being the growing conditions in any specific year and how a specific grape variety within that parcel, reacts to those conditions.

[djewesbury]

I'll ignore g-man's comment, as I clearly stated where my info came from regardless if he thinks it flies in the face of other people's stated opinions here.

Except that saying "I'll ignore that" when you didn't quite manage to ignore it sort of misses the point of ignoring it.

[DRT]

Gentlemen,

Please remember this is a nice place to be.

On a slightly different subject, I do believe that JDAW and Roy have just demonstrated full agreement. Who would have thought that could happen

[Roy Hersh]

Glad you were able to parse that Daniel. Congrats!

[djewesbury]

An admin!
Please - separate thread...?

[DRT]

An admin!
Please - separate thread...?

Tell me where you want the split.

[Roy Hersh]

Derek,

I'll toast to that, but with Julian and I, it has happened a few times in recent threads on both sites.

[djewesbury]

An admin!
Please - separate thread...?

Tell me where you want the split.

#265?

[djewesbury]

Glad you were able to parse that Daniel. Congrats!

It is possible that in parsing this I also missed the point..!

[DRT]

Derek,

I'll toast to that, but with Julian and I, it has happened a few times in recent threads on both sites.

I must have missed those

[DRT]

Glad you were able to parse that Daniel. Congrats!

It is possible that in parsing this I also missed the point..!

Dewesbury, haven't you got homework to do?

[DRT]

An admin!
Please - separate thread...?

Tell me where you want the split.

#265?

Wilco.

[djewesbury]

Glad you were able to parse that Daniel. Congrats!

It is possible that in parsing this I also missed the point..!

Dewesbury, haven't you got homework to do?

Yes, correcting your spelling...

[DRT]

Glad you were able to parse that Daniel. Congrats!

It is possible that in parsing this I also missed the point..!

Dewesbury, haven't you got homework to do?

Yes, correcting your spelling...

Sorry, thought you were just looking a bit wet and got confused.

Please quote the post you want me to split from - "263" only appears on Tapatalk, which I am not on.

[djewesbury]

This one

-....particularly when you consider that the proportion of those Romaneira vines old enough to be producing VP quality grapes in 2011 was presumably much smaller (only 36 hectares of vineyard in 2004, for instance)

I'm going to take aim at this one widely held incorrect "fact." Vines do not need to be old to make great wines. That is a myth which has perpetuated for many reasons, marketing being just one.

[DRT]

Done. Will insert links.

[djewesbury]

Done. Will insert links.

thanks.

[DRT]

Done. Will insert links.

Done.

Ding-ding

[Andy Velebil]

But where we diverge is that when you have a "dead vineyard" such as after phylloxera and a full replanting is necessary, afterwards, you don't have to do full on total vineyard replantings as specific vines die off. Vines die at various ages and in the Nacional vineyard in particular, (I've visited 9x now) each time a vine dies it is replanted, one at a time or several at a time if the need is there. But that is way different than an entire parcel of 2.5 ha requiring a 100% makeover. Adding vines on an as needed basis allows the character of the Nacional vineyard to continue to show very similar characters with the x factor being the growing conditions in any specific year and how a specific grape variety within that parcel, reacts to those conditions.

Do we really diverge? I say we don't.

First off, no one really knows how much NN vineyard was replanted. It is very possible it may not have been 100% replanted in 1925. Of course, it is possible it was. But like I said, no one alive today knows with 100% accuracy was done back in the 1920's. Because no one was there and there are no records to support what was and wasn't done. There is no hard proof other than passed down hearsay from one person to the next. We all know how that goes in the Douro..so lets all be honest with ourselves here. Now, if someone can show me hard physical proof I will stand corrected.

Current story is this plot of land somehow miraculously survived untouched by phylloxera. Considering the soil isn't the type to resist the little bug and current ungrafted vines don't survive that long, I find this a little hard to believe since supposedly the rest of the quinta was hit by it. And if it was left untouched, why the need to totally replant it then? As that goes against what Roy just wrote. 1925 was a LONG time after phylloxera and by all accounts Noval was back in full business long before that. To anyone's knowledge that I am aware of there was no such thing as Nacional prior to 1931. So if that's the case, there was never a "replant" as it was simply just part of the vineyard up until someone decided to tear out grafted vines (or revive a mortórios) and plant ungrafted vines in their place. Then make Port from this small part of land by the main house.

When one starts to look at things objectively and scientifically, things don't seem to fully add up to the stories which have perpetuated over the years.

I suspect, pure supposition here mind you, someone or more than one person back in the 1920's said "Hey, I want a little plot by the house so I can plant some non-grafted vines like the old days. Here by the house we can easily keep an eye on them and tend to them. Make a small amount of Port for just us and some friends. Someone really liked the 1931 and decided to give some away as a thank you." And thus the tradition was born.

[RAYC]

This is fascinating. Accepting that there are all sorts of different opinions, I think we need a tasting with someone like Henry Shotton where he gives us an hour or so of his time on a techy vineyard presentation / Q&A and then we have some thoroughly nice port to make it worthwhile him having suffered whatever lines of questioning we came up with...(as long as we avoid getting consumed by discussion of NN31...)

[Andy Velebil]

This is fascinating. Accepting that there are all sorts of different opinions, I think we need a tasting with someone like Henry Shotton where he gives us an hour or so of his time on a techy vineyard presentation / Q&A and then we have some thoroughly nice port to make it worthwhile him having suffered whatever lines of questioning we came up with...(as long as we avoid getting consumed by discussion of NN31...)

I'm down for that if I'm over that side of the pond. Love talking tech with vineyard managers as you get real information on how things happen. Often times much different than the generic stuff told to the masses.

[jdaw1]

I do believe that JDAW and Roy have just demonstrated full agreement. Who would have thought that could happen

That always happens when Roy is correct.

[g-man]

In good spirit, I too will ignore roy's comments for the sake of also trying to ignore, wait, what was i ignoring again?

what would be interesting is the various afflictions on the grape vines and what action each one takes.

My understanding is that there is no current "cure" / control for phyloxera, you get it, it stays. You can rip out the vines but certainly eggs would still remain and it'll just infect the new plants.
I'd be curious if phyloxera is still in the soils of the nacional plot or if it was indeed miraculously spared.

one of the cool afflictions, much like boytritis, is Eutypa Lata
The dead arm is one of my favorite wines http://iv.ucdavis.edu/Viticultural_Info ... 171&ds=351 though being int he mclaren vale, it also picks up some eucalyptis of neighboring trees

[Glenn E.]

My understanding is that there is no current "cure" / control for phyloxera, you get it, it stays. You can rip out the vines but certainly eggs would still remain and it'll just infect the new plants.
I'd be curious if phyloxera is still in the soils of the nacional plot or if it was indeed miraculously spared.

From what I've heard, phyloxera doesn't especially like sandy soil, and the soil in the Nacional vineyard is both schist and sand. So while there's phyloxera in there, it's not as bad as it is in "normal" vineyards so that's why the vines can live as long as they do.

I've never done any research to try to confirm or deny that, though.

[Andy Velebil]

G-Man,
There is no chemical or other treatment cure for Phylloxera other than grafting onto resistant American root stock.

However, the little bug doesn't like and can't live in sandy well drained soil, such as the Mosel region and a few others in the world. It also has a harder time surviving in a pure schist soil, but the Douro is not pure schist. There is a fair amount of top soil above the schist where it lives. Why the Douro, along with most of Europe was devastated starting in the 1860's.

I've walked around the NN vineyard as have others, and I've looked at the soil and looked at the soil in other parts of the quinta. Haven't seen any appreciable difference....

But back to Roy's replant stuff. IF the Nacional vineyard was Phylloxera resistant as he and others claim, why the need to totally replant this small section in 1925? That was some 40+ years after the Douro had recovered from Phylloxera, Noval was fully back in business, and had already long ago been replanted. Why not just keep replanting a vine here or there as they died or didn't produce enough anymore? It's an interesting question even Roy can't answer. Because he, and no one else, really knows. It again falls back on the folk lore of this tiny plot of land which happens to make great Port.

[Andy Velebil]

My understanding is that there is no current "cure" / control for phyloxera, you get it, it stays. You can rip out the vines but certainly eggs would still remain and it'll just infect the new plants.
I'd be curious if phyloxera is still in the soils of the nacional plot or if it was indeed miraculously spared.

From what I've heard, phyloxera doesn't especially like sandy soil, and the soil in the Nacional vineyard is both schist and sand. So while there's phyloxera in there, it's not as bad as it is in "normal" vineyards so that's why the vines can live as long as they do.

I've never done any research to try to confirm or deny that, though.

Here's a pic of the Nacional soil. Does it look sandy? Interesting in that this tiny plot of land supposedly just happens to be THAT different from the rest of the Quinta. Again, makes one think

(scroll down the top part of pic is blacked out)