Johnson: vintages don't matter any more November 13, 2007
David Higgs
Top UK wine writer Hugh Johnson has claimed that wine vintages do not really matter any more.
Speaking to UK broadsheet the Times, the veteran taster said that numerous techniques had been developed by wine growers to ensure that their crops are no longer ruined by bad weather or diseases. He claims that any year is now a good one for drinkers.
Johnson's statement, displayed in his 2008 Pocket Wine Book, is likely to divide opinions in the wine industry, especially in the sale houses. The writer railed against what he sees as wine snobbery.
'The reasons people buy a particular wine are complex but have a lot to do with snobbery,' he said. 'If you sold a non-vintage Bordeaux nobody would buy it. It would be just as good, but it would not have the romance and interest.'
Other wine writers, including Spanish expert John Radford, agreed.
'There have been so many wonders in research and we know so much that there are never going to be vintages of the appalling quality we witnessed after the washouts in France 1965 and 1968,' said Radford.
Members of the wine trade were more sceptical of Johnson's views, however, saying that climate contiditions in the year still play a large part in the wine.
Stephen Williams, managing director of the Antique Wine Company, said, 'My view is that we now make generally better wine due to both technology, but more importantly improved oenological knowledge and weather forecasting. Nature still produces wines far better than the tinkering around that mankind can do. In fact in the greatest vintages the winemakers need to do very little indeed. It has been said to me by one of Bordeaux's most reputed winemakers, that the 2005 vintage (the last great vintage) was made by wine makers from the deck-chair! Very little need for crop spraying etc. However we can now improve the taste of what would otherwise be disappointing vintages. 1997 and 2002 are perhaps examples of wines which are quite delicious to drink today, that twenty years ago would be likely as having faults significantly noticeable in their taste.' (NB this is a correction of the original comment by Stephen Williams, in which we inadvertantly misquoted him)
Hugh Johnson told decanter.com he stands firm in his views. 'I always think luxury markets are amazingly canny at keeping the supply and demand in the balance that suits them. Too much wine? Recruit more collectors. China and India have hardly started...watch this space.'
Hugh Johnson explains his position in the January issue of Decanter - out 5 December
Have your say... To post your comment on this story, email us at news@decanter.com, making sure the relevant headline is in the subject field
As usual, nature is more complex.
Yes, it is fair to say that in warm grape growing regions where terroir is of little importance, technology can now guarantee wines of good quality in each and every year. Or to put it another way, it is the producer that will be the guarantee of quality, rather than the year.
However, in cool regions terroir stamps its character on the wines, and a large part of the terroir effect is due to the meso climate that the vines grow in, and the micro climate that the bunches develop in. In other words the balance and flavours that the grapes develop are affected by the temperature, humidity, solar radiation, and so on. And this is also well understood in the scientific literature.
It therefore follows that in cool regions, cold vintages will result in very different wines to those of warm vintages. For example, almost any Pinot Noir from the hottest vintage since records began (2003) from the Adelaide Hills or southern Victoria will be very orange, short, and by now will have 9 toes in the grave. But the previous vintage (i.e. 2002) was the coolest since records began, and the Pinots from 2002 are characterised by very deep shades of red, good to outstanding length, and many are still in not even in long pants yet.
Were the Pinots from 2003 bad wines? Maybe, or maybe not. But they certainly were poor wines, and had then and have now have much less to offer than the wines from 2002.
Then there are the effects of prologed rain during vintage, …..
Mark Whisson, Whisson Lake, Australia
It isn't easy to disagree with the eminent Hugh Johnson, and of course he has a point. Especially in the New World, the cheaper wines offer the same value almost every year (never really exciting, always reasonably decent) – and even the top wines from lets say Australia have a good vintage almost every year, thanks to a lot of skill of course, but also thanks to a bit more stable climate, allowing for some generalisation. But, and not at a snobbish level, take for example three vintages from the very skillful winemaker and quality oriented Mr. Guigal from his basic Cote du Rhone rouge: 2002, 2003, and 2005. Huge differences there. The 2002 is just a not-good-at-all-watery-wine, the 2003 exhibits a lot of ripe fruit characters and is very rich, where the 2005 is an elegant Cotes du Rhone. Especially on the climate frontiers for wine making, perhaps shifting a bit due to global warming, vintages make a lot of difference. And these regions bring us many of the world's most exciting wines… Of course, the Mosel has had a few good ones in sequence (thanks to both skill and climate), but in the Loire, Bordeaux or Burgundy, even the better winemakers' wines still show remarkable differences in appearance. And what about Tuscany (nowadays a relatively modern region by all standards) 2002 vs 2005?
The starting point for winemaking is still the grape, which is still a fruit, a product from a plant. And plants tend to be effected by the weather, and thus differ in characteristics due to different weather. Wine making techniques can save a 'rotten' vintage, but never make it great – it is saving and masking the defects in the input. What goes in, comes out…
Willem Wijnen Delafranconi
Hugh Johnson is correct. I suppose this is what the modernists call progress and the traditionalists call the end of the wine world as we know it. I personally call it wine globalisation. The danger of it all is that in adjusting and dealing with problematic vintages not only are we loosing vintage characteristics but also regionality, and character, producing wines that are standardised according to what the market wants . The beauty of wine is in it's diversity and just like us human beings we can only be great if we reflect our cultural, historic and temperamental character. Individuality, based on those criteria is a virtue. A wine made in Tuscany from Merlot, aged in French oak barriques, made by a French Man specifically with the USA market in mind is the total opposite. It is like a 5 star Hotel running a Tapas Bar or an American complaining in a Pizzeria in Naples that his Pizza is not like Pizza Hut.
Some may argue that what counts is the liquid in the glass and the market who drinks it. That statement is as inspiring as saying human beings must breath to live... I ask, will we soon be adding Brunello to Barolo, to add elegance? Hermitage to spice up St-Emilion? How about Margaux stopping it's replanting programme to produce less, but super Margaux?
Maybe in the future we will start seeing wine lists offering Red, White and Rose, simply at 2 pounds, 5 pounds, 10 etc!!!!
Many generations of wine growers and wine drinkers, from all over the world have built up a good will for wine that stretches from the glass of wine in a Taverna on a Greek island to the Grandeur of a Chateau in France. Both have acclaimed passion status on their own individual merits and it is up to us and our contemporary wine growers and consumers to respect that and remember that in the final analysis Tuscany made Antinori famous, Catalunya gave Torres it's identity and Saint-Emilion gave Gerard Perse the recognition that he now possess....... not the other way round.
On a visit to Sicily a few years ago we were discussing wine at a winery on the Etna when the owners told me that they were thinking of ripping up their Nerello Mascalese to plant Merlot. When I asked why, the answer was that the situation is such, that no one wants to drink our wines anymore. At least in Sicily there is a turnaround and today producers and consumers are back to appreciating local typicity. Those who thaught that they could concker the wine world with Bordeaux style, Sicilian wines are now evidently in decline. If I want to taste a Sicilian wine I will want a Nero d'Avola, Cerasuolo di Vittoria etc.
Like wise when I feel like a claret I shall spend my money with our friends from Bordeaux.
Michael Tabone, Malta
What about 2001 in Champagne Hugh?
D. Crossley, Brighton, UK
Maybe not in the new world, but in France...
2 examples - we bought good Côte de Brouilly several years running - 1999-2004. One grape (Gamay) but every year a different flavour in a vertical tasting.
2nd, we were in Burgundy in 2006 and bought 2003 and 2004 grand cru Corton - what a contrast! 2003 ready to drink although it will last 10 years, 2004, definitely needs keeping and will keep longer.
If I am a wine snob I don't apologise - it is good fun and I like the contrasts between one year and the next. Vintages matter here in the south and south-east anyway because, one year, hail destroys all the grapes on one domaine so there is no wine - the next, magnificent. Difficult for wine growing economics I know but interesting for the buyer.
Jon North, Lunel, France
Mr H. Johnson is a highly respected name amongst the wine community and his views are always very interesting, however...How can you, Mr. H. say something like that!? We all agree that some region or wineries, without mentioning anyone, uses vintages to bring their prices very high, but to say that vintage does not matter? I would say, technology will help avoid catastrophy or help bringing out the terroir or even help a wine to be drinkable in some cases, but mother nature is what makes winemaker so special. They need to understand her and react to her mood swings! Of all the things that can be argued in wine, weather is probably one of the few that one can't discuss. Good or bad, it will make the difference between one year to another.
Non vintage still wine...thanks, but no thanks.
Quentin
As with all generalizations, there are always going to be exceptions, especially when the weather is perfect or horrendous. However, for most vintages, Mr. Johnson has a very good point. Take California wines over the past 10 to 20 years. In my humble opinion, the differences between vintages is much less marked than the differences between producers. A couple months back we had a vertical tasting of 8 vintages of Estate Pinot noir from a prominent Russian River Valley producer. There was some obvious aging effects between the oldest and the youngest wines, but what surprised us was how little variation there was between the vintages. More recently we tasted 6 Pinot noirs from different producers in the same vintage and the differences were incredible. It made an argument for finding a winemaker whose style you prefer rather than stocking up different producers in specific vintages. The more interesting question is: Does this make an argument for "Terroir?"
Tony Soltis
Although I do believe that the majority of wines, both Old World and New World, have 'poorer' vintages, I think the most important thing to remember is that even if a wine can be of good quality year after year, they will always be different. In this manner vintages will always be important, or at least should be. One of the most fascinating and exciting elements about being a oenophile is to be able to compare and contrast the different characteristics that are produced each year. A wine that is produced due to ideal weather conditions will generally be of better quality than a wine that needs to be technologically improved, and as any winemaker knows, the more you tamper with a wine, the more potential there is in a loss of quality. I have nothing against the pursuit in scientific advancements, but nothing that man creates can ever exceed that of nature's own work.
Katie
A very big generalization on Mr. Johnson's part I feel. I believe that a top producer will still make a good wine in a poor vintage, in a top vintage more is expected and if the fruit is better quality then the wine will be superior to that from a lesser vintage as long as everything goes according to plan in the winery. Even though I try to stay loyal to the producers I work with whatever the vintage report may be, in a so called great vintage you expect the wines to be better quality thus one buys more. It is impossible to expect even these designer wineries that cater for a certain market segment to produce the same quality year after year, even though they have the technology to have a huge impact on the final product. In any case I will continue to look for and discover the subtle differences in a wine that only the terroir, climate and people can bring about from vintage to vintage. This for me is what makes wine drinking a life long commitment.
Ben Hill, Gotenborg, Sweden
It may not be absolutely true, but it is absolutely more true than absolutely not true. The parallel issue is that wines are better now than before, though less distinctive, and at the expense of truly distinctive appellation-specific styles.
Barry Bassin, FL, USA
I get the sense of this, but it does not factor in the human element: the winemaker. We have seen as recently as 2003 that good winemakers almost always make good wine, but less skilled vintners are not always so dependable.
It will still be the difficult vintages that will, as the trade has always said, separate the wheat from the chaff.
Greg Finger, Seattle, USA
I was stunned that someone like Hugh Johnson could come out and say such a thing! At the end of the day, the wine depends on what Him Above sends us - in spite of chemicals and modern techniques. Yes, there will always be some good wines in bad years. Therefore, for an elite who can afford to pay for the very best, the years "may" matter less. Be assured, however, they still matter. Especially if you want to drink the wine. ("Investment" assumes that at some point the wine will be consumed.)
For the rest of us who like good value-for-money wines, and actually drink it, I would always advise taking into consideration the year, otherwise, we will all be very disappointed!
Apart from a few exceptions, we have all been spoilt by the climate since 1976.
I wonder how many lesser vintages Hugh Johnson has in his cellar.
I wholeheartedly agree with him, however, that there is too much snobbery attached to wine!
Amanda Gallou, Amanda's Wines, Valaire, France
I agree with those who have distinguished between hot climes and France. So fr tas the latter is concerned, it is one thing to say that, in what would once have been very bad vintages, decent wine is now made by good winemakers — that is to say that there are now no ”bad years” but only ”winemakers' years”. It is entirely another to say that there is now no difference between vintages. If Hugh Johnson is saying the former, he is right, if, which I doubt, he is saying the latter, it is demonstrable headline seeking nonsense.
He seems to be talking in very general terms, as quoted. When he speaks of a non-vintage Bordeaux being ”just as good” (as what, I ask?), he cannot mean that 2002 on its own, or to make it non vintage, blended with soem other less good year, would produce a wine of the same quality as 2000 or 2005 or, on the Right Bank, 1998. If he does mean it, no doubt he will be happy to agree to exchange with me all his Saint-Emilions of these last three vintages for the same crus from
2002? I await to hear from him — considerably to my advantage in my view.
Tim Hartley
A bow to the master: I first learned about wine from the first edition of Johnson's World Atlas--it fell to pieces under my scrutiny.
Of course in general Johnson is right (yellowtail products are quite, though not entirely, consistent). As other contributors have noted, however, in particular he is wrong.
My five fanaticisms in wine are Tokaji, Madeira, Sauternes, Auslesen and above, and Vintage Port. One example only, and I rest my case: Suduiraut 2001 vs. 2002, the first one of the richest and longest-lasting Sauternes I've ever tasted, the second merely good. Noble rot does still depend on vintage--Mr. Johnson knows this, having been associated with the Royal Tokaji Company, if I'm not mistaken. . . Dr. John Rempel, Winnipeg, Canada
Of course the year is important! In order to know if the wine is no longer good or not. A lot of wines are good during the 2-3 years that following the grapping harvest (not the white and pink wines which are better the first year…). Not after, they lost their flavour. So it's not always a question of snobing but reality!
Axelle Fichtner
Register on decanter.com absolutely free for news alerts delivered direct to your email inbox, and our fortnightly newsletter with advance notice of what’s coming up in Decanter magazine, offers, competitions and more.
PLUS registration is a one-stop shop for the Decanter magazine Archive and Decanter Fine Wine Tracker.
As usual, nature is more complex.
