For several years Australians have believed that we are the world’s most technologically-advanced winemaking country. We probably are. But only the most heavily-blinkered patriot would suggest that we make the world’s best wine. Technology and wine quality do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. In the mass-production of sound, reliable consumer wine there is no question that our advanced knowledge, techniques and equipment have made our commercial wine the envy of other wine-producing nations, as their present success on the export market clearly shows. But it is also true that our not all our premium wines are seen with universal appeal outside our own shores. In several areas of premium winemaking it has become clear that if we are to perform to the best of our potential in the prestige end of the wine market, it will be through the combination of our excellent understanding of the winemaking processes with some of the more basic, and often risky, techniques of the traditional winemakers overseas. It might be reasonable to suggest that in Australia we have tried to re-invent the wheel, by using our own innovation and ability to make wine of the quality of the classic producers in Europe, while at the same time ignoring some of the variables that have made them what they are. And in no way do I mean to imply that we should attempt to duplicate these wines – that would be impossible. Our aim should be to duplicate, and even improve where possible, their quality. Fundamental to this discussion is the question of wine quality. What is it? In my opinion wine quality should be measured by the amount, finesse and complexity of flavour, the absence of flaws which detract from the flavour of the fruit, and the balance between the components of the wine’s flavour. Technology has improved our wine to the extent that there is really no excuse for the sort of winemaking fault which spoils a wine, even though small flaws are inevitable in any cross-section of our wines. In this regard alone, our wines are as good as those anywhere. It has become increasingly apparent that whereas we can achieve a great volume of flavour, Australian wines still need more depth and complexity before they can be compared to their truly great European rivals. Think of complexity as being the number of different flavours in a wine – the spectrum of which is responsible for the overall sensation of flavour. The advances in Australian winemaking have focussed for too long on developing the best single variety, technique, equipment, or whatever – which is exactly the direction taken by the rest of agriculture. In many cases high-yielding and relatively-flavourless cultivars have replaced high-quality apples, tomatoes and other crops. You must have noticed that apples don’t have the quality of the past. And why not? They don’t have the depth and complexity of flavour – which is exactly what we look for in premium quality wine. New techniques allow you to pick crops without much flavour, and ripen them artificially to the extent that they may look fabulous but taste ordinary. So the modern agricultural producer has been forced to grow large quantities of commercially-acceptable crop. To do this a disease-free environment is created, and the modern system of ‘monoculture’ is established. One cultivar, one clone and one technique to plant, grow, harvest and treat the entire crop. It is obvious that complexity of flavour in these situations is hardly a consideration for the producer – he sells on quantity of a minimum standard, not on absolute quality. The wine industry has done the same thing, which has helped us to make the best commercial-quality wine in the world. But it is clear that a different philosophy is required to make premium wine – for here complexity is a major consideration. Complexity in wine is firstly achieved through creating a variety of different components – even if they all come from a single source – then by judiciously blending them together to arrive at a tightly-knit integration of the individual elements. Take the example of sparkling wine. One of the most important factors in the quality of Champagne is its base wine. The great houses have access to a multiplicity of vineyards, each of which are planted to different clones of the premium varieties, Pinot Noir, Pinot Meunier and Chardonnay. Even prior to harvest the sources of complexity are already numberless. Three different varieties, several different clones of each one, and perhaps a hundred or more different vineyards with their own peculiar soil and climatic characteristics. The French call this the conept of the `terroir’ – the understanding of individual sites and their specific qualities. Different batches of wine can be handled separately, and made in different ways. Some may be fermented in wood, others in neutral tanks. Some may be oxidised, some put through a malolactic fermentation. The number of possible permutations able to be used to create the initial sources of complexity are almost endless. In Australia we are beginning to use a similar approach, and the results are already a quantum ahead of what we have made in the past. Our Chardonnays are another example of how we are adapting our techniques by looking to the traditional producers. Many are being partially or wholly fermented in oak. You can leave the juice on skins before pressing, or you can ferment on grape solids. You can use any combination of several premium origins of oak cask in maturation. You can use a malolactic fermentation to any degree you choose. Once again, the variables are endless. Modern understanding has enabled our winemakers to go back to traditional techniques and selectively choose those which will enhance their wines. It looks good for premium Australian wine. Our winemaking attitude has improved to the extent that our best producers are sacrificing quantity for quality in the vineyard, and the comfort of modern labour-saving techniques for quality and complexity in the winery. It is a sign of maturity that has already given the established European and American markets reason to take notice, but the message is clear…they ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
