Winophilia

Wine lovers often refer to wines as “Old World” or “New World” in style, sometimes without even being able to explain what they mean. What do these two terms mean to you? What are the characteristics that would make YOU call a wine New World or Old World?”

Frédéric Engerer, Château Latour (France). I just don’t think Old World vs New World is a good “cut.” I’m not sure it will help a wine amateur to better understand wine. I’m more interested in the traditional vs. modernist approach in EACH wine region: Ridge vs. Colgin in Napa, Dugat Py vs. Rousseau in Gevrey, Pavie vs. Figeac in Saint-Emilion, Cos vs. Montrose in 2009 maybe? I’m sure there is the same kind of difference in Argentina or Chile. So personally I find Old World vs. New World doesn’t really make a lot of sense anymore and is finally a bit vague.

Steve Doerner, Cristom Vineyards (Oregon). Although I think the lines are increasingly becoming blurred as time goes on and New World wineries try to imitate Old World wines and vice-versa, for me the difference would be that Old World wines have an earthiness about them and perhaps a bit more complexity while New World wines rely primarily on fruit and cleanliness. A simplification but there you have it.

Mike Dobrovic, Havana Hills (South Africa). What a wonderful question, as it almost forces one to start thinking laterally. Perceptions are not reality, so what is reality? Perhaps a whole number of perceptions?

I remember a story told by Lars Mark, the owner of Buitenverwachting in Constantia. He was at a tasting where a winemaker from a famous estate in the Médoc was presenting his wines. The French winemaker proceeded to state that the Médoc was better than the New World because it had a history that was longer. However, when Lars Mark challenged him and said that Constantia had been producing wine when the Médoc was still a “mosquito infested swamp,” the cat was literally out of the bag and what a wild cat it was.

Suffice to say a lot of fun was had by all and it was perhaps a pity that the French winemaker left in a huff and did not remain for the fun!

But often I have heard the statement that the Cape is the bridge between New and Old World styles, i.e., that the Cape produces wines with both Old and New World characteristics. To some extent I agree with that statement, even if there is only perception and no “real” reality to it. We simply do not yet know enough to make a conclusive statement.

Clonal selections that came to the Cape 350 years ago from France were from which farm? Were they good or bad? Later selections which were sent by the French to South Africa (in the early 1900s) were heavily infected with a wide range of viruses, probably due to the phylloxera introduced to Europe from the Americas, and thus the need for grafting, which transmitted viruses from one plant to another. This obviously affected the flavor profiles of the wines.

Climate and soil also have a major impact on the chemical composition of the wines; the interplay between various minerals on grape composition is still barely understood, to say the least. How we as modern (and older) generations have influenced that with the spraying of copper (toxic to many soil micro-organisms) is yet to be understood.

But finally to get to your question “what do the terms Old or New World” wines mean to me, my perceptions are, in as few words as possible:

New World: Cleaner, richly defined fruit, softer and more accessible.

Old World: More austere, softer fruit definition and only accessible later.

Then again there are a number of exceptions. Is this a case where the exception proves the rule? Perhaps, but that is simply my perception. Viva la difference!

Daniel Brunier, Domaine du Vieux Télégraphe (France). For me, these two styles are different, depending on whether or not the wines have “soul,” not depending on the geographic origin of the wines.

This is due to the fact that in the past, a very small number of wines made outside of Europe were capable of showing something other than fruits, wood taste or richness.

No soul, no real spirit, was their characteristic: the Old Europe in opposition with the rest of the world. Today, the New World style is produced everywhere in the world, largely including Europe. As it’s more difficult to produce an Old World style, its spread around the world is slower.

Dave Powell, Torbreck Vintners (Australia).  The difference in my mind between New World  and Old World in style is:

New World wines are mostly fruit forward.

Old World are more often renowned for being more restrained and elegant.

Although quite often now the lines are becoming pretty blurred as you can have New World wines made in an Old World style and vice- versa.

Paul Amsellem, Domaine Georges Vernay (France). In the past, I used to refer to these words “Old World” and “New World.” Twenty years ago, wines were so different in terms of style. “New World” showed impressive wines with deep colours, high alcohol levels and sometimes a high extraction and a strong oaky taste. On the other side, “Old World” meant wines of subtlety and grace, balanced, elegant and terroir-oriented. Travelling in many parts of the world, I saw a big evolution in fine wines over this period. Now I do not refer anymore to wines as “Old World” and “New World” in the same way.

Fine wines from the West Coast of the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and so on can be extremely delicate and offer a lovely balance that I like in wines from France or Italy, for example. I do not mean that “New World” wines are now becoming like “Old World” wines and gained from getting closer to the style of an “Old World” wine. I mean that at the same time that “Old World’ wines gained in style from the modern approaches used by the “New World,” “New World” wines found their own identity. What I like in fine wines from the “Old World” is their “footprint,” this unique taste that tells you immediately the area where the wine comes from. And fine wines from the “New World” can now boast this “footprint.” A great pinot noir from Burgundy and a great pinot noir from New Zealand do not taste the same but both are delicious and express a unique identity. The pinot noir from New Zealand shows some aromas that make it original (the “New Zealand” footprint or “New World” footprint). This is the way I now refer to wines as “Old World” or “New World” in style.

Jacques Lardière, Louis Jadot (France). The energy activity of “Old World” is more moderated and more “channelled.” That is, the molecular explosion during the process of fermentation: digestion is more complete, the demineralization of the source rock is very complete.

The result is that a more opened harmony is felt, as is the aesthetics of the aromatic molecular hierarchy.

Anthony Hamilton Russell, Hamilton Russell Vineyards (South Africa). Nowadays there are more and more examples of Old World style wines in the New World and New World style wines in the Old World, so the two major stylistic camps are no longer good geographic designators and are now more aesthetic differentiators.

I am a passionate admirer and enjoyer of the aesthetics of good Old World style wines and while I have enormous respect for many good New World style wines I do not enjoy them nearly as much.

Assuming we are referring to good wines, to me an Old World style wine is one which transcends the characteristics of the grape – as a fruit – to tell a story of place in some evocative and almost impossible-to-describe way. The flavours and aromas go beyond simple fruit flavours and aromas and wood influences and evoke a whole series of associations, some with an almost primal appeal. Soil, minerals, savoury things, other things we can’t find words for which appeal emotionally. The flavours and the feel of the wines are the kinds of things we grow to like over time, but seldom engage with immediately as newcomers. Dryness, vibrant fine tannins, absence of sweetness, austerity sometimes, lack of immediacy.

To me a New World style wine usually has too much to say about the grape and the person making the wine and too little to say about the place and the history behind it. The flavours and aromas have immediate analogies from common experience and the wines are accessible and easier to understand. The characteristics are those that are more approachable for newcomers. Sweetness (often alcohol sweetness), fullness, bigness, absence of any edgy tannin, prominence of identifiable fruit aroma and flavour. Confectionary often springs to mind.

An interesting and difficult question to answer!

Pietro Ratti, Renato Ratti (Italy). I would normally call a ” New World style” a wine with more ripe and jammy fruit, less acidity and more alcohol content, overall more opulent and sweet finish, while an “Old World style” will be a wine with more dry fruit, higher acidity, overall with more finesse, elegance and a dry finish.

Marc Beyer, Léon Beyer (France). Old World, New World: difficult question—one doesn’t like to look sectarian.

Old World: Every grower, even producing a few barrels, does vinify his own way and try to convince everybody that his product is the best in the world. The general style may be more balanced, appealing to drink as much as to taste.

New World: Generally bigger enterprises consulting the market to see what style of wine the market may be looking for, and then vinifying in that direction. Usually the target is more fullness, body-building more than balance and freshness. Often better to taste than to drink.

Manfred Krankl, Sine Qua Non (California). Interesting question. It is obvious what it means literally, but what does it mean stylistically and to ME? Off the cuff I would probably say “Old World” brings about notions of a certain rusticity, more musty, non-fruit driven aromas and flavors, possibly more and/or more noticeable tannins. Also wines that may require more patience to show their best, but also have more potential for longer aging.

“New World”—on the fly—might conjure up ideas of wines with more up-front and direct fruit aromas/flavors, bigger, more opulent wines with softer tannins, maybe more new oak use, a more polished palate sensation, an earlier drinking window and a correspondingly shorter life span.

However, as I think about it with all the cylinders in my brain firing, I believe that this is a rather clumsy and outdated generalization. Most certainly when talking about the upper echelon of fine wine. Here I think the lines have become rather blurred. Many wines made in the Old World show all the characteristics I have described as New World above and vice-versa.

There are countless reasons for this. Europeans have experienced quite a few warm/hot vintages, conditions that are much more New World-like, plus much work has been done in the vineyards and technological advances made in the winery that make many Old World wines take on more of a New World character as I have defined it above. On the other hand, many New World producers have become more cautious (if that is the word), a little less gung-ho in their approach, more thoughtful perhaps, and in the process have reined in the (over)opulence of their wines, which have become more nuanced.

This does not mean that wines are now “the same” all over the world. Soil and climatic conditions—terroir if you prefer—are still vastly different in the old and New World and aromatic and flavor profiles will remain forever individual. But the outlying goalposts—the two extremes—have surely been moved closer together.

Ultimately I never really think in terms of old versus New World. I think in terms of good versus bad wine and in terms of a wine’s distinction, uniqueness, and most importantly the pure enjoyment of drinking it.