ThePortForum.com

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

g-man wrote: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

I've been there, and yes to my untrained eye the soil in the Nacional vineyard looks somewhat sandy. But I'm comparing it to the clay I grew up with in Nebraska and the glacier-plowed loam+rocks that we have here in Washington. It isn't sand, but to me it does look like sandy soil.

Your point is a good one, though. Why or how is the soil in the Nacional sub-plot different than what's right next to it? Was there construction that brought in sand for some purpose that was somehow mixed into the soil near the buildings? Has it always been different, or is it a side effect of something that happened in the 1920s when the vineyard was replanted?

It may be simply the extra care that goes into the Nacional vineyard, but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. Maybe it's the care, maybe it's the specific field blend, maybe it's the soil, or maybe it's the varying ages of the vines as they're continually replaced. But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

I am entering a realm in which I have no knowledge but I thought the 'standard' Noval 31 was often better than the Nacional 31? Was there a difference in the bottlings?

Glenn E. wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

g-man wrote: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

I've been there, and yes to my untrained eye the soil in the Nacional vineyard looks somewhat sandy. But I'm comparing it to the clay I grew up with in Nebraska and the glacier-plowed loam+rocks that we have here in Washington. It isn't sand, but to me it does look like sandy soil.

Your point is a good one, though. Why or how is the soil in the Nacional sub-plot different than what's right next to it? Was there construction that brought in sand for some purpose that was somehow mixed into the soil near the buildings? Has it always been different, or is it a side effect of something that happened in the 1920s when the vineyard was replanted?

It may be simply the extra care that goes into the Nacional vineyard, but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. Maybe it's the care, maybe it's the specific field blend, maybe it's the soil, or maybe it's the varying ages of the vines as they're continually replaced. But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

hopefully my taste buds dont tell me that nacional often tastes like the 83' nacional.


but there's also barrel selection, age time, location in cellar, type of pressing, grape selection. all those can attribute to different tastes

LGTrotter wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

I am entering a realm in which I have no knowledge but I thought the 'standard' Noval 31 was often better than the Nacional 31? Was there a difference in the bottlings?

Well, it depends on who you believe. Most people, including Roy, will tell you '31 NN is usually better than the regular. However, Cristiano Van Zellar has said the regular '31 has always been better than the Nacional. Considering he's probably had it more than any of us, and he used to run Noval back when his family still owned it, I suspect he would know far better than anyone else. The current owner of Noval, AXA, doesn't even have any '31 in their cellars (for the record, last I was told they have one old bottle that has no label or other capsule identifying what it is. So it is unknown if that is a '31 or not. That may or may not have changed since I was told that).

As for different bottlings (which I assume you mean different bottling runs done of each respective Port), no one really can say for sure. Any potential records were lost when in 1981 their Lodge in Gaia burned, taking the records with it.

LGTrotter wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

I am entering a realm in which I have no knowledge but I thought the 'standard' Noval 31 was often better than the Nacional 31? Was there a difference in the bottlings?

it's probably bottle variation and age. two factors that can lead to incredibly subjective analysis of what is "better"

g-man wrote: ...

but there's also barrel selection, age time, location in cellar, type of pressing, grape selection. all those can attribute to different tastes

Yes, now your on the right track.

Is that little plot of land really that different by itself? I say no. But it's the extra care put into such a small plot of vines, the care when picking, sorting, treading in it's own small lagar, and how it's handled after. That is what makes the difference IMO.

Andy Velebil wrote:

g-man wrote: ...

but there's also barrel selection, age time, location in cellar, type of pressing, grape selection. all those can attribute to different tastes

Yes, now your on the right track.

Is that little plot of land really that different by itself? I say no. But it's the extra care put into such a small plot of vines, the care when picking, sorting, treading in it's own small lagar, and how it's handled after. That is what makes the difference IMO.

unless you're in burgundy of course, and you happen to own a plot of land in richebourg aoc

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

That's the question, isn't it? None of us knows the answer.

As to does it really... I think you know the answer to that. Look at the recent releases - Noval and Nacional aren't always released in the same year, which pretty definitively says that they perform differently.

Glenn E. wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

That's the question, isn't it? None of us knows the answer.

As to does it really... I think you know the answer to that. Look at the recent releases - Noval and Nacional aren't always released in the same year, which pretty definitively says that they perform differently.

could purely be for monetary purposes!

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Exactly how so? And does it really?

Exactly. Do you have to look further than the miserable run of Nacional in the 80s to have evidence that Nacional is about much more than the intrinsic quality of the soil (which may indeed provide the X factor if - but only if ”“ everything else is done right)

RAYC wrote:

Andy Velebil wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:....but I think we have to accept what our tastebuds tell us. There is something different about Nacional. ... But something makes that vineyard perform differently than the rest of Noval.

Do you have to look further than the miserable run of Nacional in the 80s to have evidence that Nacional is about much more than the intrinsic quality of the soil

I seem to recall that the regular Noval was just as rubbish during the 80s, so that doesn't really prove the point.

So I have a couple thoughts on all this, please forgive that some of them pertain more to earlier comments, as I've just read the whole thread in one go.

First, all the talk on vine vigor, grape concentration/quality v. Age, and the like should come with a giant qualifier: it depends! Different varieties behave very differently at different ages. For instance, Zinfandel does very well as an old vine crop. It remains fairly consistent, becomes more concentrated, and still maintains a usable yield. This is the same with Syrah, where the vines seem to age nicely. Other varieties do not age as well, for instance, pushing Cabernet to that kind of age doesn't seem to work as well. After a certain point, perhaps 50-80 years, you don't seem to be gaining additional concentration and character, just sacrificing volume, and more of it than the aforementioned varieties. Now, I have no clue how the different varieties of the Douro behave, but I'm guessing there is a range of behaviors from the different grapes.

Now, as for younger vines, there have been a lot of correct assertions given. It's true, you can get some good grapes from 2-3 year old vines, but the fact that they are relatively unpredictable, need 2-3 years to be trained properly and build some strength into whatever shape you're training, and are more vigorous if you just drop the crop those first couple years, it's usually not worth trying to get grapes.

Youngish vines, those in the 3-15 year range, can definitely produce wonderful wines, but need a great spot to make up for the (relative) lack of concentration. Price aside, would you rather have a Romanee-Conti from 5y/o vines, or a village level Burgundy from very old vines? Probably the Grand Cru, as the plot has demonstrated its quality. So the idea that a great VP could be made in the right year and place from 6-8 y/o vines doesn't surprise me at all.

As for NN, I believe you've probably got phylloxera challenging the NN vines, but I could definitely believe that plot is sandy/schisty enough to make a difference. What you see on the surface isn't necessarily what's 6 inches down (Think Cote-Rotie, there is actually soil under all those rocks). That said, you very well might not have an appreciable gain in quality pushing your vineyard past an average of 35 years to make up for the lesser yields, even if the vines don't succumb to phylloxera by 70 or so (which I'm guessing is the top end of the vine age).

Finally, replacing individual vines is time intensive, but has multiple advantages to ripping out and replacing a whole block. First, you can maintain production of the block, while cash might not be an issue for Noval, it's gotta be nice to not need to shut down NN for 3-5 years. Second, you do avoid shifting the balance of other flora and fauna in the vineyard. It may not seem like it, but for great wines, the ambient yeasts, microbes, bugs, etc make a difference. Lastly, while you may be shifting the character of the vineyard a bit with each vine replaced, at the worst it's a glacial speed shift in character, which is something we, as consumers, appreciate in seeing as a consistent expression of the place.

Whew, long post!

CaliforniaBrad wrote:Whew, long post!

But very well considered and explained. I agree with and/or happily accept everything you have said.

I agree with DRT’s agreement with CaliforniaBrad’s long post.

Excellent post indeed. Just following up the vine vigour paragraph, while different grape varieties have different age envelopes, do they still have the same shape in terms of vigour i.e. low vigour then higher vigour then lower vigour? If so, then the maxim still holds true.

griff wrote:Excellent post indeed. Just following up the vine vigour paragraph, while different grape varieties have different age envelopes, do they still have the same shape in terms of vigour i.e. low vigour then higher vigour then lower vigour? If so, then the maxim still holds true.

As I was taught, it's actually just high to low vigor as a vine ages, but the first couple years you're attempting to channel all that vigor into the vine growth and not worry about fruit. The vine hangs a small crop in the first year or two because it's not big enough to hang anything bigger, not that it wouldn't if it could. By year 3 or so, you can have a huge crop, if you want/weather cooperates.

CaliforniaBrad wrote:

griff wrote:Excellent post indeed. Just following up the vine vigour paragraph, while different grape varieties have different age envelopes, do they still have the same shape in terms of vigour i.e. low vigour then higher vigour then lower vigour? If so, then the maxim still holds true.

As I was taught, it's actually just high to low vigor as a vine ages, but the first couple years you're attempting to channel all that vigor into the vine growth and not worry about fruit. The vine hangs a small crop in the first year or two because it's not big enough to hang anything bigger, not that it wouldn't if it could. By year 3 or so, you can have a huge crop, if you want/weather cooperates.

Thank you Brad. As always the little knowledge I have is a dangerous thing

Haha, having only helped at wineries and taken classes, I can't say I've seen it actually happen, so take all my words with a grain of salt. Lord knows I've learned a thing or two wrong in my life .